q .7 v 




It 0 



* .o * o "> ^0- 



,0° 



X' 



o 0 A 



,0o. 



0 o 



A* 



i 9 ^> 



mm* Z °WM 



i 



,0o 



o o 



'-A 1 



o 0 



,0 o 



UNIVERSALIS! ASSERTED 

On the Authority of 

REASON, THE FATHERS, & HOLY SCRIPTURE. 



BY THE 

REV. THOMAS ALLIN 

n 



" A threefold cord is not quickly broken. "- 
Eccles. iv. 12. 



Second Edition, enlarged. 



LONDON : 

ELLIOTT STOCK, 62, Paternoster Row, London, E.G. 

1887. 



\ 




WESTON -SUPER-MARE : 
PRINTED BY J. MARCHE, 14, OXFORD STREET, WESTON-SUPER-MARE. 

Drew The© log. ^ em * 



22 Jet 



! 




PREFACE. 



The question of questions to which an answer is 
attempted in the following pages, is essentially this, can 
Evil triumph finally over Good ? If we answer affirmatively 
with the popular creed, we are practically falling into 
Dualism ; if we reply negatively, we are teaching Univer- 
salism. Such are the issues really involved. The more 
often and the more clearly this is stated as the turning point 
of the entire controversy about the larger hope, the better 
for those who write,- and for these whoread. The Calvinist 
settled this question by, ,.in i fact, . affirming that if evil 
triumphs, it is because God so orders, i.e., because God 
decrees to evil an eternal existence ; thus saving or trying 
to save God's omnipotence, but at no less a cost than that 
of blackening His character, nay, of virtually making Him 
a partner in evil. But the popular creed saves neither 
the omnipotence of God, nor yet preserves His character. 
Sin, the one thing most utterly hateful in His sight, 
He tolerates for ever and ever, poisoning and defiling 
His works, and defying His power — satisfied, if in 
this brief life he cannot' have obedien^e-and righteousness 
— satisfied with endless disobedience and sin hereafter ! He 
appears before all creation as trying to dislodge sin. only 
to fail ; as sending His Divine Son to save all men in order 
that He may return rejected, baffled, vanquished. And so 
the curtain falls on the great drama of creation and redemp- 
tion, presenting such a picture as this — a baffled Saviour, a 
victorious Devil, a ruined creation, sin triumphant 
— and so to continue for ever— a heaven wholly base 
(p. 42), a hell wholly miserable. Strong as these 



iv. 



PREFACE. 



words are, they are not strong enough, for the horrors 
and the contradictions of the popular creed alike 
defy description. / And these horrors are taught, these 
contradictions are believed in the face of the plainest 
teaching of God's two revelations, His primary revelation 
to our moral sense, His written revelation in Holy 
Scripture. Of the former and its teachings, it is needless 
to speak here ; of the latter I have spoken at some length, 
and have tried to shew that from its first page to its last the 
Bible is the story of one who is our Father — one whose 
' wrath,' and ' fire,' and ' judgement,' are at once most real, 
and yet one and all are the expressions of that essential Love 
which He is— One who being Almighty is sending His Son 
to assured victory, to reconcile to Himself, all things, 
4 whatsoever and wheresoever they be.' I know how eagerly 
men strive to save the popular creed by various modifica- 
tions, by diminishing the number of the lost, by softening 
their torments, by asserting their annihilation, &c. What 
are all these but so many tacit confessions that men every- 
where feel it impossible to maintain the creed still generally 
professed? What are they but in fact so many vain 
attempts to disguise the awful fact of God's defeat, to hide 
if it may be the victory of the Evil One ? For so long as 
sin lingers in a single heart, so long as a single child of the 
Great Parent perishes eternally, whether annihilated, or sent 
to Hell, so long is the Cross a failure, and the Devil ctSoccS 
practically -victor. 

In deference to the wishes of friends, I have taken 
advantage of issuing a new edition to change the title of 
this volume, for one expressing more clearly its purpose. 
I may, perhaps, add that the present edition has been, not 
alone most carefully revised, but very considerably 
enlarged, and, indeed, in some parts wholly re-written, 
especially those dealing with the patristic evidence. 



FATHERS AND EARLY WRITERS QUOTED. 



PAGE. 

Ambrose . . . . . . 93 181 222 249 

Ambrosiaster . . . . . 80 81 88 155 

Anselm . . 109 

Archelaus. 82 

Arnobius 103 

Athanasius 178 

Athanasius (?) 80 

Athenagoras 85 

Augustine ....... 82 106 

Chrysostom 80 178 

Clemens (Romanus) . . . . . .78 

Clement (of Alexandria) . . 82 85 102 103 204 

Cyprian .80 

Cyril (of Alexandria) 81 

Didymus . . . . . , . 92 217 

Diodorus ....... 94 

dorotheus . 81 

DURANDUS i . 109 

Gregory (Thaumaturgus) 87 



(of Nyssa) 84 90 96 102 118 145 152 157 



205 216 220 225 231 248 

„ (of Nazianzus) 80 89 

(The Great) 79 

Erigena J. Scotus 109 

Eusebius . . . . ' . . . .80 
Facundus ........ 98 

Hermas . 103 

Hilary 1 (The Deacon). See Ambrosiaster. 

Hilary ....... 222 249 252 



FATHERS AND EARLY WRITERS QUOTED. 



Page. 



Iremus . . . . . • 80 103 

Jerome 81 96 106 149 154 155 156 157 206 208 214 
223 

Justin Martyr 103 

Leo . . . . , . . . .247 
Leo (Imperator) . . . • . . . .81 
Liturgies — 

„ Apostles 100 

„ Armenian ..... 99 

Basil . . . . . .99 

„ Chrysostom . . . . . 99 

?J Ethiopic 100 

James 100 

Malabar 99 

„ Maruthas . . . . . 99 

Eoman ...... 100 

Methodius . . . . . . . 204 

Nicodemus (Gospel of) . . . . 79 80 

Origen . . . . . . 86 102 204 218 222 

Rufinus 87 92 

Tertullian 204 

Theodore (of Mopsnestia^ .... 94 

Theodoret . . ' . . . 95 102 145 250 
Theophilus . . . . . . . 84 

Titus (of Bostra) . . \ ' . . . . 89 

Sibylline Oracles 86 

Victorinus F. Marius 87 



ERRATA 



Page 78. For "Clement" read "Clemens." 

„ 80. The treatise Be unci. Christ, belongs to a 
later age than S. Cyprian. 

,, „ The passage quoted from Be myst. Pasch. 

is from S. Ambrose and not from 
Ambrosiaster, to whom the passage 
assigned to S. Ambrose on p. 81 
belongs. Of the two passages assigned 
to S. Gregory the last is not his. 

„ 109. For "Durandas" read "Durandus." 

„ 187. For pp. 38-9 read p. 53. 

„ 200. For pp. 2-3 read pp. 11-12. 

„ 238. Add the following after the words "mercy 
to everyone:" — "Thus, too, light 
falls on the remarkable words of 
Scripture, ' The law entered that the 
offence might abound,' and so the law 
is ' our schoolmaster to bring us unto 
Christ' " 

,, 253. Omit " in third and fourth lines. 



" THE QUESTION STATED." 



CHAPTER 1. 



THE QUESTION STATED. 

" Shall notthe judge of all the earth do right." — Gax. xviii. 25. 

What am I but the creature Thou hast made ? 

What have I but the blessings Thou hast lent ? 

What hope I but Thy mercy and Thy love ? * * 

Thou wilt not hold in scorn the child who dares 

Look up to Thee, the Father. * * * O. W. Holmes. 

1, The following pages are written under 
the pressure of a deep conviction, that the views 
generally held, as to the future punishment of 
the ungodly, wholly fail to satisfy the plain 
statements of Holy Scripture. The popular 
creed has maintained itself on a Scriptural basis 
solely, I believe, by hardening into dogma mere 
figures of oriental imagery ; by mistranslations 
and misconceptions of the sense of the original 
(to which our Authorised Version largely 
contributes) ; and finally, by completely ignoring 
a vast body of evidence in favour of the salva- 
tion of all men, furnished, as will be shewn, by 
very numerous passages of the New Testament, 
no less than by the great principles that pervade 
the teaching of all Revelation. Again, I write, 
because persuaded, that however loudly asserted 



THE QUESTION STATED. S 



and widely held, the popular belief is at best a 
Tradition — is not an Article of Faith in the 
Catholic Church — is taught in no Creed — is 
accepted by no General Council, nay is distinctly 
opposed to the views of not a few of the holiest 
and wisest Fathers of the Church, in primitive 
times ; who, in so teaching, expressed the belief 
of very many, if not the majority, of Christians 
in their days. 

2. Further, I write, because deeply and pain- 
fully convinced of the very serious mischief which 
has been, and is being produced by the views 
generally held. They in fact tend, as nothing 
else ever has, to cause, I had almost said, to 
justify, the scepticism now so widely spread; 
they effect this because they so utterly conflict 
with any conception we can form of common 
justice and equity. 

3. Therefore of mercy I shall say little in 
these pages : it is enough to appeal, when speak- 
ing of moral considerations, to that sense of 
Right and Wrong which is God's voice speaking 
within us. Indeed, among the many miscon- 
ceptions with which all higher views of the 
Gospel are assailed, few are more unfounded, 
than that which asserts, that thus God's justice 
is forgotten in the prominence assigned to His 
mercy. This objection merely shews a complete 
misapprehension of the views here advocated. 
•For these views do in fact appeal to, and by this 
appeal recognise, first of all, the justice of God. 



4 



THE QUESTION STATED. 



It is precisely the sense of natural equity which 
God has planted within us, that the popular 
belief in endless torment most deeply wounds. 

4. And these considerations are in fact a 
complete answer to some other objections often 
heard. " Why disturb men's minds," it is said, 
" why unsettle their faith, why not let well 
alone ?" By all means, I reply, let well alone, 
but never let ill alone. Men's minds are already 
disturbed: it is because they are already dis- 
turbed, that we would calm them, and would 
restore the doubters to faith, by pointing them 
to a larger hope, to a truer Christianity. A 
graver objection arises, but like the former 
wholly without foundation in fact. It is said, 
" By this larger hope you, in fact, either weaken 
"or wholly remove all belief in future punish- 
" ment. You explain away the guilt of sin." 
The very opposite is surely the truth, for you 
establish future punishment, and with it that 
sense of the reality of sin (to which conscience 
testifies) on a firm basis, only when you teach a 
plan of retribution, which is itself reasonable and 
credible. A penalty which to our reason and 
moral sense seems shocking, and monstrous, 
loses all force as a threat. It has ever been thus 
in the case of human punishments. And so in 
the case of Hell. Outwardly believed it has 
ceased to touch the conscience or greatly to 
influence the life of Christians. To the mass of 
men it has become a name and little more (not 



THE QUESTION STATED. 



5 



seldom a jest).; to the sceptic it lias furnished 
the choicest of his weapons; to the man of 
science a mark for loathing and scorn : while, 
alas, to many a sad and drooping heart, who 
longs to follow Christ more closely, it is the 
chief woe and burden of life. But the conscience, 
when no longer wounded by extravagant 
dogmas, is most ready to acquiesce in any 
measure of retribution (how sharp soever it be) 
which yet does not shock the moral sense, and 
conflict with its deepest convictions. And so 
the larger hope most fully recognises at once the 
guilt of sin, and the need of fitting retribution : 
nay, it may be claimed for it, that it alone places 
both on a firm and solid basis, by bringing them 
into harmony with the verdict of reason, of 
conscience, and of Holy Scripture. 

5. It is better now for clearness sake, to define 
that popular view of future punishment, of which 
I shall often speak. It is briefly this : That 
God will after death pass on the ungodly a 
sentence of endless pain, of endless torments; 
that from this suffering there is no hope of 
escape; that of this torment there is no possible 
alleviation. That when your imagination has 
called up a series of ages, in apparently endless 
succession, all these ages of pain and of agony, 
undergone by the lost, have diminished theii cap 
of suffering by not so much as one single drop ; 
their pain is then no nearer ending than before. 
Those who hold this terrible doctrine to be a part 



6 



THE QUESTION STATED. 



of the " glad tidings of great joy " to men from 
their Father in Heaven, differ indeed as to the 
number of the finally lost : some make them to 
be a majority of mankind, some a minority. 
Now it may be gravely questioned whether there 
can be any doubt at all from their point of view 
on this head. I 1 'or the texts on which they rely 
seem, to most minds, if they teach the popular 
creed at all, to teach, just as clearly, that the lost 
shall be the majority of men. " Many are called 
"but few are chosen." " Fear not little flock." 
" Narrow is the way that leadeth to life and few 
" there be that find it." " With most of them, 
" God was not well pleased." Indeed, it seems 
perfectly clear that the popular view requires us 
to believe in the final loss of the vast majority 
of our race. For it is only the truly converted 
in this life (as it asserts) who reach Heaven ; 
and it is beyond all fair question, that of profes- 
sing Christians only a small portion are truly 
converted; to say nothing of the myriads and 
myriads of those who have died in Paganism. 
But even waiving this point, the objections to 
the popular creed are in no way really lightened 
by our belief, as to the relative numbers of the 
lost and the saved. The real difficulty consists 
in the infliction of any such penalty, and not in 
the number who are doomed to it. Nor need 
we forget how inconceivably vast must be that 
number, on the most lenient hypothesis. Take 
the lowest estimate ; and when you remember 
the innumerable mvriads of our race who have 



THE QUESTION STATED. 7 



passed away — those now living — and those yet 
unborn — it becomes clear that the number of the 
lost must be something in its vastness defying 
all calculation ; and of these, all, be it remem- 
bered, children of the great Parent — all made in 
His image — all redeemed by the life blood of His 
dear Sox ; and all shut up for ever and ever 
(words, of whose awful meaning, no man has, 
or can have, the very faintest conception) in 
blackness of darkness, in despair, and in the 
company of devils. 

6. Let me next shew what this Hell of the 
popular creed really means, so far as human 
words can dimly convey its horrors, and for this 
purpose I subjoin the following extracts — one 
from a Roman Catholic divine, one from Dr. 
Pusf.y, and one from Mr. Spurgeon. " Little 
" child, if you go to Hell there will be a devil 
" at your side to strike you. He will go on 
" striking you every minute for ever and ever 
" without stopping. The first stroke will make 
" your body as bad as the body of Job, 
" covered, from head to foot, with sores and 
" ulcers. The second stroke will make your 
" body twice as bad as the body of Job. The 
" third stroke will make your body three times 
" as bad as the body of Job. The fourth stroke 
" will make your body four times as bad as the 
"body of Job. How, then, will your body be 
" after the devil has been striking it every 
" moment for a hundred million of years without 



THE QUESTION STATED. 



" stopping. " Perhaps at this moment, seven 
" o'clock in the evening, a child is just going 
" into Hell. To-morrow evening, at seven 
" o'clock, go and knock at the gates of Hell and 
" ask what the child is doing. The devils will 
" go and look. They will come back again and 
" say, the child is burning. Go in a week and 
" ask what the child is doing ; you will get the 
" same answer, it is burning. Go in a year and 
" ask, the same answer comes — it is burning. 
"Go in a million of years and ask the same 
" question ; the answer is just the same — it is 
" burning. So if you go for ever and ever, 
"you will always get the same answer it is 
" burning in the fire." — The Sight of Hell, Rev. 
J. Furniss, C.S.S.R. "Gather in one, in your 
" mind, an assembly of all those men or 
" women, from whom, whether in history or in 
"fiction, your memory most shrinks, gather in 
" mind all that is most loathsome, most revolt- 
" ing * * * conceive the fierce fiery eyes of 
" hate, spite, frenzied rage, ever fixed on thee, 
" looking thee through and through with hate 
" * * * * hear those yells of blaspheming, 
" concentrated hate as they echo along the lurid 
" vault of Hell ; every one hating every one 
" * * * Yet a fixedness in that state in 
" which the hardened malignant sinner dies, 
" involves, without any further retribution of 
" God, this endless misery." — Sermon by the 
Rev. E. B. Pusey, D.D. " " When thou diest 
" thy soul will be tormented alone ; that will 



THE QUESTION STATED. 



.9 



''be a Hell for it : but at the Day of Judgment 
" thy body will join thy soul, and then Thou 
" wilt have twin Hells, thy soul sweating drops 
" of blood, and thy body suffused with agony. 
"In fire, exactly like that we have on earth, 
" thy body will lie, asbestos like, for ever 
" unconsumed, all thy veins roads for the feet of 
" pain to travel on, every nerve a string, on 
" which the Devil shall for ever play his dia- 
" bolical tune of Hell's unutterable lament." — 
Sermon on the Resurrection of the Dead, by Rev. 
C. H. Spurgeox. Awful as are these quotations, 
I must repeat, that they give no adequate idea at 
all of the horrors of Hell ; for that which is the 
very sting of its terrors — their unendingness — 
is beyond our power really to conceive, even 
approximately : so totally incommensurable are 
the ideas of time and of eternity. 

7. But it will be said, we no longer believe 
in a material Hell — no longer teach a lake of real 
fire. I might well ask, on your theory of 
interpreting Scripture, what right have you so to 
teach? But let me rather welcome this change of 
creed, so far as it is a sign of an awakening moral 
sense. Yet, this plea, in mitigation of the horror 
your doctrines inspire, cannot be admitted ; for 
when you offer for acceptance a spiritual, rather 
than a material flame, who is there that cannot 
see that the real difficulty is the same, whether 
you suppose man's body burned or his spirit 
tortured ? It may be even maintained, fairly, 



10 THE QUESTION STATED. 



that a Hell which torments the higher part, is 
rather an aggravated than a mitigated penalty. 

8. Merely to state this doctrine in any form, 
is to refute it for very many minds. So deeply 
does it wound, what is best and holiest in us ; 
indeed, as I shall try to show further on, it is, for 
all practical purposes, found incredible, even by 
those who honestly profess to believe it. This 
terrible difficulty, felt and acknowledged in all 
ages, has been largely met for the Roman 
Catholic, by the doctrine of Purgatory, which 
became developed as the belief in endless torment, 
gradually supplanted that earlier and better faith, 
which alone finds expression in the two really 
Catholic and Ancient Creeds, faith in Everlasting 
Life. How immense must have been the relief 
thus afforded, is evident, when we remember that 
the least sorrow, however imperfect, the very 
slightest desire for reconciliation with God, though 
deferred to the last moment of existence, was 
believed to free the dying sinner from the pains 
of Hell, no matter how aggravated his sins may 
have been. Among the Reformed Communions 
this difficulty was met, no doubt, by a silent 
incredulity — often unconscious — vet ever in- 
creasing, on the part of the great majority ; 
indeed, some divines, have at all times, both in 
England and on the Continent, openly avowed 
their disbelief in endless torments. This growing 
incredulity has found, in our day, open expres- 
sion, in a remarkable theory, that of Conditional 



THE QUESTION STATED. 



11 



Immortality (itself a revival of an earlier belief). 
This doctrine, briefly stated, teaches that man is 
naturally mortal, that only in Jesus Christ is 
immortality conferred on the righteous — that 
the ungodly shall be judged, and after due 
punishment, annihilated. 

9. Of this dogma I shall at once say, that, 
while it degrades man, it fails to vindicate God. 
A writer, whose words I am glad to adopt, speaks 
of it as " that most wretched and cowardly of all 
" theories, which supposes the soul to be natur- 
" ally mortal, and that God will resuscitate the 
" wicked to torment them for a time and then 
" finally extinguish them. I can see no ground 
"for this view in Scripture but in mistaken 
"interpretations, and it does not meet the real 
" difficulty at all, for it supposes that evil has in 
" such cases finally triumphed, and that God 
" had no resource but to punish and extinguish 
" it : which is essentially the very difficulty felt 
" by the sceptical mind. I have called it cowardly, 
" for it surrenders the true nobility of man, his 
" natural immortality, in a panic at an objection, 
" and like all cowardice, fails in securing safety." 
— Donellan Lectures, p. 31, Rev. Dr. Quarry. 
Besides, this theory has evidently the character 
of a makeshift, an afterthought. The conscience 
has been shocked by the popular creed, and has 
taken refuge in the first shelter that offered. 
Men have seen death and destruction repeatedly 
denounced in the Bible as the sinner's doom, and 



12 



THE QUESTION STATED. 



they conclude, contrary to the whole spirit of 
Holy Scripture, that death, in its pages, implies 
annihilation. But this view is, in the case of the 
Old Testament, quite unfounded ; for earthly 
destruction is all that the expressions, there relied 
on, really teach; and in the case of the New 
Testament is completely inadequate : because, 
there, death and destruction have a far wider 
significance, and one far deeper. Nay, as I hope 
to point out, there is in New Testament usage a 
deep spiritual connection between death and 
life ; death becomes the path to, and the condition 
of, life. 

10. Another view adopted by a number, pro- 
bably extremely large, and increasing, differs 
altogether from that last stated. Those who hold 
it have had their eyes opened to the fact, that the 
New Testament contains very many long 
neglected texts which teach the salvation of all 
men. They have also learned enough to have 
their faith gravely shaken in the popular 
interpretation of the texts usually quoted in proof 
of endless pain. The theory of conditional 
immortality fails to satisfy such men. They see 
that it is altogether unsuccessful in meeting the 
real difficulty of the popular creed, i.e., the 
triumph of evil over good, of Satan over the 
Saviour of man, and therefore over God. They 
perceive, too, the narrow and arbitrary basis on 
which it rests in appealing to Holy Scripture. 
And so they decline to entertain it as any solu- 



THE QUESTION STATED. 



IB 



tion of the question, and say, " We are not able 
" to accept any theory definitely of the future of 
" man, because we do not see that anything has 
"been clearly revealed. Enough has been dis- 
" closed to shew to us that God is love, and we 
u are content to believe, that happen what will, 
" all will ultimately be shewn to be the result of 
" love divine." 

11. It is impossible to avoid sympathy with 
much of this view at first sight, but only then; 
for when closely examined it is seen to be open 
to the charge of grave ambiguity or far worse. 
It may mean that in the future God will act as 
a loving human parent would, and then I reply, 
this is precisely the larger hope. Again, it may 
mean a very different and very dangerous thing. 
It may mean that at the last my ideas of right 
and wrong will undergo a complete change — 
that the things which I now pronounce with the 
fullest conviction to be cruel and vile will at that 
day seem to me righteous and just, and that thus 
God will be fully justified though He inflict end- 
less torment. But take this statement to pieces 
and see what it really means. It means, in effect, 
practical Atheism. It means blank Agnosticism. 
This is easily shewn. For what this view really 
tells me is that my deepest moral convictions are 
wholly worthless, because that which they declare 
to be cruel and revolting, is right and holy, and 
will so appear at the last. But if this be so, then 
I have lost mv sole measure of ris;ht and wrono-. 



14 



THE QUESTION STATE!). 



What is truth or goodness, I know not. 
Religion, therefore, is impossible. Conscience 
ceases to be a reliable guide. Revelation is a 
mere blank, for all revelation pre- supposes the 
trustworthiness of that moral sense to which it is 
addressed. Thus the above plea, plausible as it 
seems, is wholly ambiguous, and does in fact lead 
either to the larger hope or to mere unbelief. 

12. In opposition to both these theories stand 
the views here advocated, which have been always 
held by some in the Catholic Church, nay, 
which represent, I believe, most nearly its primi- 
tive teaching. These views are, I know, now 
widely held by the learned, the devout, and the 
thoughtful in our own and in other Communions. 
Briefly stated, they amount to this : — That we 
have ample warrant, alike from reason — from the 
observed facts and analogies of human life — from 
our best and truest moral instincts — and from 
Holy Scripture itself, to entertain a firm hope 
that God our Father's design and purpose is, 
and has ever been, to save every child of Adam's 
race. 



CHAPTER II. 



"THE POPULAR GREED WHOLLY UNTENABLE." 

* ' These questions * * educated men and women of all classes 
' 4 and denominations, are asking, and will ask more and more till 
' ' they receive an answer. And if we of the clergy cannot give 
" them an answer, which accords with their conscience and reason 
" * * then evil times will come, both for the clergy and the 
"Christian religion, for many a year henceforth." — Canon 
Kingsley — Water of Life. 

" The answer which the popular theology has been tendering for 
"centuries past will not be accepted much longer * * I disclaim 
"any desire to uphold that theology which I have never aided in 
' : propagating." — Rev. Dr. Littledale — Contemporary Review. 

The next step will be to state, more in detail 
the various considerations that render it impos- 
sible to accept the popular view of future punish- 
ment. My first appeal shall be to that primary 
revelation of Himself, which God has implanted 
in the heart and conscience of man. I am merely 
expressing the deepest and most mature, though 
often unspoken, convictions of millions of earnest 
Christian men and women, when I assert, that to 
reconcile the popular creed, or any similar belief 
in Hell, with the most elementary ideas of justice, 
equity, and goodness (not even to mention mercy), 
is wholly and absolutely impossible. Thus this 



16 



THE POPULAR CREED 



belief destroys the only ground on which it is 
possible to erect any religion at all, for it sets 
aside the primary convictions of the moral sense ; 
and thus paralyses that, by which alone we are 
capable of religion. If God be not good, just, 
and true, in the human acceptation of these terms, 
then the whole basis of revelation vanishes. For 
if God be not good in our human sense of the 
w T ord, I have no guarantee that He is true in our 
sense of truth. If what is called goodness in 
God in the Bible, should prove to be that which 
we call badness in man, then how can I be 
assured that, what is called truth in God, may 
not really be that which in man is called false- 
hood? Thus no valid communication — no 
revelation — from God to man is possible ; for no 
reliance can, on this view, be placed on His 
veracity. 

"We dare not," says the Bishop of London, 
" Let go the truth, that the holiness, the good- 
" ness, the justice, the righteousness, which the 
" eternal moral law imposes on us as a supreme 
" command, are identical in essential substance" 
"in our minds and in His." — Bampt. Led. 
" We dare not?" Why? Precisely because, if 
we do, the foundations of religion collapse — 
perishing as the moral order perishes. Mere 
Scepticism is our sole refuge. We have lost our 
standard of right and wrong and are wandering 
in a pathless desert, creedless, homeless, hopeless, 
mocked all the while by phantoms of virtues 



WHOLLY U XT EX ABLE. 



17 



that are probably vices, and of vices that are 
probably virtues. For let me repeat that 
if goodness in becoming infinite turns into evil — 
if infinite love may be consistent with what we 
call cruelty — then, for aught we know truth may 
turn into falsehood, justice into flagrant wrong, 
light into darkness. Yes, Ave dare not let go 
the truth that in our moral nature we have a true 
revelation of the divine mind, i.e., that the ideas 
of right and wrong are in their essence the same 
in our minds and in God's — that they are true 
universally ; as true beyond the grave as here and 
now. But if so, then that which so flatly con- 
tradicts all our deepest moral convictions, as does 
the dogma of endless sin and pain fa dogma 
which, however softened, no imaginable hy- 
pothesis can reconcile with either justice or mercy) 
must be absolutely false, and in teaching it we 
are but libelling God. 

" All the attempts yet made," says a 
stern moralist, " to reconcile this doctrine 
" with divine justice and mercy, are calcu- 
" la ted to make us blush alike for the human 
" heart that can strive to justify such a creed, 
" and for the human intellect that can delude 
" itself into a belief that it has succeeded in such 
"justification." No less emphatic is the testi- 
mony of one who, far beyond others, seemed in 
his daily life to have caught the spirit of Jesus 
Christ. " Nothing," says the late Gen. Gordon, 



18 



THE POPULAR CREED 



" can be more abject and miserable than the usual 
" conception of God. * * Imagine to yourself 
" what pleasure it would be to Him to burn us or 
" to torture us. Can we believe any human being 
" capable of creating us for such a purpose? 
" Would it shew His power ? Why He is 
" omnipotent. Would it shew His justice ? 
" He is righteous, no one will deny it. We 
" credit God with attributes which are utterly 
hateful to the meanest of men. * * I say 
" that christian Pharisees deny Christ. * * 
" A hard, cruel set they are, from high to low. 
" When one thinks of the real agony one has gone 
" through in consequence of false teaching, it 
" makes human nature angry with the teachers 
" who have added to the bitterness of life." 

The popular view to you is familiar, and 
perhaps you do not realise its' true bearing, or the 
light in which it really presents the character of 
God. But consider how this dogma of endless 
torture must strike an enquirer after God, one 
outside the pale of Christianity, but sincerely 
desirous of learning the truth. There are such 
men — there are many such. You tell this 
enquirer that God is not Almighty only, but all 
good ; that God is indeed love ; that God is his 
father. But these terms are words without any 
meaning at all, if they have not their common 
ordinary sense when applied to God. Such a 
man will say you tell me God is good, but what 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



19 



acts are these you assign to Him? He is a 
father ; but He brings into being myriads of 
hapless creatures, knowing that there is in store 
for them a doom unutterably awful. He calls 
into existence these creatures, whether they will 
or no ; though the bottomless pit is yawning to 
receive them, and the flames ready to devour them. 
The question is not, whether they might have 
escaped ; the real question is, do they in fact 
escape, and does He know that they will not escape. 
And you assure me that this Great Being is 
Almighty! is love essential! is the parent of 
every one of these creatures, who are doomed and 
damned ! What fair answer do you propose to 
give to these questions if addressed to you? 
I may put the question in the words of a well 
known poet. A lost soul asks — 

' ' Father of mercies, why from silent earth 
" Didst Thou awake and curse me into birth?" ' 

Pressed by the irresistible weight of these 
arguments, many take refuge in ambiguous 
phrases, e.g., " Be sure God will do the best He 
" can for every man." Ambiguous and empty 
words, I repeat, as used by the advocates of 
endless torment. For if they really mean that 
the best an Almighty Beino; can do for countless 
myriads of his children is to bestow on them, 
whether they will or not, an existence, stained 
with sin from the womb — knowing that in fact 
this sin will ripen into endless misery — then 
such phrases as the above are but so much dust 



20 



THE POPULAR CREED 



thrown in our eyes, they are as argument beneath 
refutation. And if they do not mean this, such 
pleas are worthless as a defence of the ordinary 
creed. If endless misery is the certain result, 
known and foreseen, of calling me into ex- 
istence, then to force on me the gift of life, is to 
do for me not the best, but the worst possible. 

Others take refuge in the vain assertion that 
the larger hope implies the escape of the wicked 
from all punishment, and places the sinner on a 
level with the saint. Let me once for all reply 
that no statement can be more unfounded. For 
the very method of healing the finally impenitent, 
as taught b} r the larger hope, is the severity of the 
divine judgment, is that consuming fire, which 
must burn up all iniquity. Thus the larger hope 
is especially bound to teach for the obstinate sinner 
the certainty of retribution, for in God's judg- 
ment it sees the mode of cure (see chap, ix.), the 
mode in which the grace of the Atonement 
reaches the touched heart. Thus unrepented sin 
leads to awful future penalty — to penalty pro- 
portioned to the guilt of the sinner and con- 
tinued till he repent. 

The larger hope thus not merely accepts, but 
emphasises for the ungodly the dread warning of 
wrath to come — of the fires of Gehenna — for in 
these it sees not a wanton revenge, but at once a 
just retribution and a discipline that heals the 
obstinate sinner. 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



21 



Many again seek to mitigate the j List horror 
and loathing which the popular creed inspires, by 
saying that the torments of Hell are not material 
but spiritual, and by asserting further (contrary 
to the plainest teachings of experience) that some- 
how the majority do really turn to God in this 
life or at the last moment of half conscious 
existence. Such apologies are in truth the 
resources of a doomed and perishing dogma ! 
In reply I will only say that it is startling to find 
able men forgetting that such pleas, were they 
never so true, do not even touch the central 
difficulty of the popular creed. For whether 
our Father permits (to use the softest term) the 
endless misery of countless myriads upon myriads 
of His own children, or of thousands only, 
whether Hell receives fifty or onlv five per cent, 
of the Sons of God, of the Brothers of Christ 
Jesus — and again, whether its torments are 
applied to their bodies or to their spirits, all these 
are points that, however decided, do not even 
touch the central question, i.e., can evil be 
stronger than God, ever, under any circum- 
stances ? — can a Father permit the endless, hope- 
less, agony of any of His children, and look on 
calmly for ever and ever unmoved by their woes? 
— can the Bible be mocking us when it teaches a 
restitution of all things, and that a time is coming 
when there shall be no more pain, but God shall 
be all in all ? 



22 



THE POPULAR CREED 



Some will, no doubt, say that we have no right 
to measure God's ways by our private judg- 
ments, no right to seem to dictate what He will 
or will not, can or cannot, do. I reply that this 
objection rests on a complete misapprehension. 
We do not presume to discuss what God, in the 
abstract, can or cannot do, still less to dictate 
to Him. The argument employed in these pages 
is open to no such objection as the above, for it 
is simply this — that God has both in his primary 
revelation of Himself to our moral sense, and in 
His written word, distinctly and emphatically 
declared against the doctrine of endless torment. 
Because God has so spoken, we therefore speak. 

Others again assert that endless misery is 
sufficiently accounted for by saying that it comes 
as the natural result of sin, and not as arbitrarily 
decreed. I am wholly unable to see how this in 
the very least alters the divine promise to restore 
all things, or annuls the work of Christ, which 
is to "put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself." 
Surely the more natural the tie between sin and 
misery, the more assured is the destruction of 
both, for the closer the bond, the more certain it 
becomes that to put away, i.e., to abolish (Heb. 
ix. 26) the one is to abolish the other. 

But probably the way in which most people 
satisfy their own minds, when doubts arise, as to 
the endless nature of future torment is this. 
" Endless pain and torment is but the result of 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



23 



u sin freely chosen, and finally persisted in by 
"the sinner," it is said. Now, let us look more 
closely at this statement, and see what it really 
means. Doubtless, all will admit that God is 
Almighty; that God is all true ; that God is all 
good ; that He is, in short, infinite in power, in 
truth, and in goodness. But when you tell me 
that it is possible for the human will to resist the 
divine, you are, in fact, denying each of these 
divine attributes. You deny that God is Almighty, 
for you make man's will stronger than His. You 
deny God's veracity, for He has over and over 
asserted, that to Him every knee shall bow, and 
every tongue confess. You deny God's infinite 
goodness, for the obstinate and final choice of 
evil, by any of His creatures, is a triumph of evil 
over good. 

But even were it true that man's will can defy 
and overcome God, that fact would form no de- 
fence of the popular creed. If endless torment 
be cruel and hateful, and endless sin repugnant 
to every conception of God, you do not alter 
the essential character of these facts by any possi- 
ble theory as to the power of the human will. 
Indeed the difficulties of the popular creed would 
be, as we shall see, aggravated, rather than 
lessened, by claiming for man a freedom to defeat 
God's purposes. As the point is important let 
us see whether any such unrestrained freedom 
can be claimed for man. And first, is it not 



24 



THE POPULAR CREED 



strange that this claim to be independent of God, 
to defy His control, is made for man, in one 
direction only, i.e., precisely when and where it 
may do to him irreparable mischief. We cannot 
add so much as a cubit to our statue, cannot 
determine so much as the length of an eyelash. 
We cannot of ourselves take a single step heaven- 
wards. But we can, on this theory, take as many 
steps hell wards as we please. We cannot save 
ourselves, but we can damn ourselves. 

But next, it obviously follows that if man is 
in this sense free, God is not free. God, as we 
know from His word, wills the salvation of every 
man, and if He cannot because of man's will, 
effect this purpose, then He is not free. He wills 
but His will is useless to save ; it is fettered and 
bound. And what is this but a virtual denial of 
the true God? Whoever such a being may be 
He is not the God of the Bible. To the ver} r 
essence of God it pertain s to be sovereign and 
supreme. 

" I appeal to the tribunal of a sovereign judge," 
says Canon Westcott — "whose will is right and 
whose ivill must prevail." — Hist. Faith p. 37. 
And again, " It is enough for us to acknowledge 
" the supreme triumph of divine love from first 
" to last — one will of one God reconciling the 
" world to Himself in Jesus Christ His only 
" Son." — lb. p. 67. " I am obliged to believe," says 
Maurice, " that we are living in a restored order. 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



" I am sure that restored order will be carried out 
" by the full triumph of God's loving will." — 
Life ii. 19. These words sum up the teaching 
of Scripture. For the Bible, while recognising 
in man a power of choice, so that no one is 
saved against his will, but by God's working in 
him a good will, yet points distinctly to God's 
will as supreme, as certain finally to prevail. 
" My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my 
" pleasure. — Ps. xlvi., 10. He doeth according to 
" His will in the armies of heaven and among 
"the inhabitants of earth." — Dan. iv. 35. 
" Whatever the Lord pleased, that did He, in 
"heaven and on earth. — Ps. cxxxv. 7. 

Kay, Scripture goes farther still. It tells 
us plainly that man has been made " subject to 
" vanity (sin and imperfection), not willingly , but 
"by reason of Him who hath subjected the same 
" in hope." — Rom. viii. 20. Again, " God hath 
" shut up all unto disobedience that He might 
"have mercy upon all." — Rom,, xi. 32. Notice 
how fatal are these passages to the dream of man's 
will thwarting God, and the sadder dream of an 
endless hell for any. tor, " who hath resisted 
" His will?" And so of salvation we are plainly 
told that it is " not of Him toho ivilleth, but of 
"God who sheweth mercy." He " worketh all 
" things according to the counsel of His own 
"will." It is He " that worketh in us. both to 
" will and to do." 



26 



THE POPULAR CREED 



To say that man can defy with success the 
sovereign will of God (whose will and counsel 
is to save all men) is at once to reject Holy 
Scripture, and Him who is its author. To deny 
the supremacy of His will is, in plain terms, to 
deny His existence. 

And that which Scripture so plainly affirms, 
the very idea of redemption implies. For redem- 
tion is either an empty sound or it implies setting 
free the will of man, i.e., bringing it into harmony 
with God's will. " The bondage I groan under 
"is a bondage of the will and that has led me 
" to acknowledge God as emphatically the 
" redeemer of the will * * but if of my will then 
"of all wills." — F. D. Maurice. Hence is 
evident the fallacy of the plea we are discussing, 
viz., " That men go to Hell because they freely 
" choose evil and persist in so choosing it for ever ." 
For I have just shewn that this assertion begs 
the whole question, by assuming contrary to 
Scripture (and no less to reason) that man is able 
successfully, to defy God's will, i.e., that God is 
not supreme; that there is a virtual dualism. 

I may sum up briefly, by saying of this plea 
that it, as has been shewn (a) contradicts the plain 
teaching of Scripture, (b ) contradicts the very 
idea of redemption, (c) contradicts the very idea 
of God as supreme, and as free; and so denies God. 
Further let me proceed to shew that it (d) con- 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



27 



tradicts itself, and that (e) even if true it would 
but aggravate the difficulties of the popular creed; 
I say then that it is self-contradictory ; for to assert 
that because of man's freedom he can go on for 
ever choosing evil, is, in fact, to plead not for 
human freedom, but' for servitude, the basest, 
the most degrading. Take the assertion to pieces 
and it comes to this. To preserve man's dignity 
he must be permitted to become the slave of evil 
if he will, the associate of devils for ever ! — to 
secure his prerogative of freedom he must be 
allowed to sink into hopeless servitude to sin ! 
What would you say were an earthly father to 
reason thus ? — I will permit my child to become 
a hopeless drunkard for the sake of preserving 
his sobriety — I will permit my daughter to sink 
into vice for the sake of preserving her chastity. 

Further, this pleading for endless sin in hell on 
the ground that it is freely chosen by man, would, 
if true, but enhance the great difficulty of the 
popular creed — the victory of evil — for plainly, 
the more free on man's part, the more wilful his 
choice of sin, so much the more complete is the 
triumph of evil — so much the more absolute the 
failure of the cross. What is this plea but in fact 
seeking to vindicate the Almighty by laying stress 
on His defeat, seeking to justify Omnipotence 
by emphasising His impotence? 

An important question remains. Admitting 
that man is free, in what sense, to what extent is 



28 



THE POPULAR CREED 



he free ? Take once more the solemn words from 
which no appeal lies. " God hath shut up all unto 
" disobedience," no choice allowed, no appeal 
permitted. Thus it is literally true of every 
man's present state, that he enters into life ' ' halt 
"and maimed" by his Creator's design. Hence, 
the only condition of true freedom for man is the 
divine control. The paradox is true — constraint 
of man's will is his emancipation. " If the Son 
"make you free then are ye free indeed." To 
plead against this constraint of the divine grace, 
as annulling human freedom, would be as wise as 
it would be on the part of the friends of some 
fever- stricken patient, to object to the restraints of 
the sick room and the physician. 

Thus on the highest authority we know that 
man steps on the stage of life " shut up unto dis- 
" obedience." Let us next see what the admitted 
facts of life testify as tothe amount of freedom per- 
mitted to man. In the first place he can exercise 
no choice at all as to the time and place of his 
birth, facts all important in deciding his religious 
belief and through that his character — no choice 
as to the many and very complex hereditary in- 
fluences moulding his entire life though most often 
he knows it not, nay affecting for good or for evil 
every thought, every word, every act of his. 

Further, man can exercise no choice at all, as 
to the strength of that will he receives ; no choice 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



2d 



at all, as to the circumstances that surround him 
in infancy and childhood, and which colour his 
whole life ; no choice at all as to the original 
weakness of his nature, and its inherent tendency 
to evil. More, still, he can exercise no choice at 
all, on this vital question, whether he will or will 
not have laid on him the awful perils, in which, 
on the popular view, the mere fact of life involves 
him. You tell me of the terrible risks of human 
life, of its infinite responsibilities ; you are fond 
of enlarging- on the taint of original sin, on our 
inability to help ourselves. True, but what does 
all this prove ? surely this, that a good Being 
would not have bestowed such a gift, except with 
a purpose, clear and definite, that all should 
issue in good. " Nothing, "says Bishop Newton, 
" is more contrariant to the divine nature and 
" attributes, than for God to bestow existence on 
" any being, whose destiny He fore-knows must 
"terminate in wretchedness without recovery. " 
— Final State of Man. 

"Let us take an illustration that we may, see this 
" more clearly. A frail and narrow bridge swings 
" across a gulf, fearful and fathomlessr On this, as it 
"rocks wildly in the winds, a father places his young 
" child. Beyond, on the other side of the gulf, 
" he has placed a prize beyond estimate, which 
"he promises to the child if he passes the bridge 
" safely, and then compels him to go, command- 
"ino- him to look neither to the right nor 



so 



THE POPULAR CREED 



"left. * * The boy, heedless and disobedient, 
" hesitates, reels, the bridge quivers for a moment, 
" swings from under him, and hurled into the gulf 
"he is caught and impaled on a sharp rock down 
"the abyss. There he hangs for long and weary 
" years, agonizing and w r rithing in torture, and 
" crying to his father for help and deliverance. 
" But his father turns a deaf ear to all his 
" entreaties, wholly indifferent to the horrible 
" sufferings of his child, and justifies himself by 
" saying, the boy might have passed the bridge 
" safely, he was warned and he suffers justly," 
Now, would not all men and angels pronounce 
this father a monster and a fiend? And shall 
God place me on the frail and narrow bridge of 
life, stretched over the awful and flaming abyss 
of endless perdition, with the possibility of a 
heaven beyond, and then leave me there to cross 
it, swinging fearfully in the winds of temptation, 
knowing that as a matter of fact I shall, in cross- 
ing, be precipitated into the horrible pit, there to 
lie forever, in hopeless agony? A well-known 
poet put the plea thus, in the form of an address 
to God — 

" And canst thou then look down from perfect bliss 
" And see me plunging in this dark abyss, 
" Calling thee, father in a sea of fire, 
" Or pouriny blasphemies at thy desire ? 

Yes, the question is essentially this, and no 
argument can evade this enquiry : — Is God good, 
and is He a just God, as men use these terms, or 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



SI 



is He not? Indeed, if the God we worship be 
not good, as we call goodness, it were better for 
us not to worship Him at all; better for us to 
worship nothing at all, than to worship an evil 
deity. But the popular view represents God as 
doino- that which the most degraded human heing 
would not do. " This view," says the Rev. Dr. 
Littledale, " puts God on a moral level with 
" the devisers of the most savagely malignant 
" revenge known to history." — Cont. Review. 

To this in fact it comes, that the popular view, 
while admitting God's power and goodness to be 
infinite, yet teaches that evil shall ultimately 
prevail — a position obviously untenable, and 
indeed absurd. " Order and right cannot but 
u prevail finally, in a universe under His govern - 
" ment." — Butler's Analogy. For argue as you 
please, refine, explain away, it continues still an 
insuperable difficulty, on the popular view, or any 
mere modification of it, that the Devil is victor 
and triumphs over God and goodness. It is 
nothing at all to the purpose to allege, either that 
those who perish finally have chosen evil of their 
own will, or that all evil beings are shut up in 
chains and torment: it is the very permanence of 
evil in any shape: its continued presence — no 
matter from what cause — that constitutes the 
triumph of the Evil One. 



" To suppose," says Canon Westcott, " That 



32 



THE POPULAR CREED 



" evil once introduced into the world is for ever, 
" appears to be at variance with the essential con- 
" ception of God as revealed to us." — Hist. Faith. 
I repeat that if evil be as strong as God, as endur- 
ing as God himself, there is no escape from the 
conclusion that you proclaim in so teaching, the 
triumph of the Evil One. You are proclaiming, 
not the catholic faith, but a dualism. You blot 
from the faith of Christendom its fundamental 
article, " I believe in one God the Father 
Almighty. What are all heresies, all errors, that 
have stained the Church of God, compared with 
this supreme heresy, this dualism, which seats 
evil on the throne of the universe, a power endur- 
ing as God himself? The torments, physical and 
mental, of the popular hell, awful as they are, 
recede into almost nothing as compared with the 
far more awful spectacle of God vanquished, of 
God trying to save but failing, and watching His 
children as they slowly sink beneath the endless 
sway of Satan ; of God's Son returning, not in 
triumph, but in defeat, of the Cross shattered, 
prostrate, paralysed. 

Again, so revolting to our moral nature is the 
popular creed, that it, more than any other cause, 
as has been said, [produces the most wide-spreading 
unbelief. " Compared with this," remarks J. S. 
Mill, "all objections to Christianity sink into 
" insignificance." Let me speak plainly. Too 
long — far too long — have the clergy been silent; 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



38 



content to complain of a scepticism, of which a 
doctrine they continue to teach (without, I believe 
in many cases, more than a languid and traditional 
acceptance of it) is a main cause. And as this 
doctrine is the parent of unbelief at home, so 
abroad in the mission field it is a previous 
hindrance to the spread of the gospel. The very 
heathen are shocked by a dogma more cruel and 
horrible than anything of which they have ever 
heard ; the more so when they are asked to receive 
this awful teaching as good news ! I repeat that 
no thoughtful man can believe a doctrine con- 
demned by the conscience, and so men will seek 
a refuge in scepticism, when they hear the clergy 
teaching these evil traditions (for they are no 
more) as part of the revelation of that God whose 
blessed Son tasted death for every man. Yes, 
the peculiar horror of the popular creed is, that it 
sets up evil as an object of worship — of reverence 
— of love. 

I invite you here to consider a weighty and 
solemn fact. Amid the crowd of sins there stands 
out one in sad preeminence because it has not for- 
giveness " for the age," eis ton aiona, its for- 
giveness demands ages — demands a period in- 
definitely long. Now, from our Lord's own 
words we may understand in what lay the essence 
of this awful sin. It lay in confounding the good 
and evil spirit, in ascribing to the one the works 
of the other. If then any one whose conscience 



34 



THE POPULAR CREED 



whispers, that endless misery can only be inflicted 
by an evil being, on his own children, still persists 
in ascribing its infliction to God, does not such 
an one incur sad and awful risk of committing- 
this greatest of all sins? I invite your earnest 
attention to this. Does your conscience say I can- 
not reconcile this awful doctrine with any idea 
lean form of love, of justice, or of goodness, and 
yet I believe it? If so, then beware lest in 
ascribing such things to God, you come perilously 
near to, if indeed you are not guilty of this sin, 
which is of all sins the greatest (known in the 
popular creed, as the unpardonable sin). 

Yes, the question of all questions is, is God 
indeed love, is the gospel really good news, not 
possible but actual, real glad tidings? All around 
us, thoughtful men are more than ever reflecting 
on these points; what answer do you propose to 
give? They are thus enquiring — pondering — 
of themselves, of their lot, of their hopes and 
fears in the future : — I find myself in this world 
(so run their thoughts) ; on me are laid, whether 
1 will or no, the awful responsibilities of time 
and of eternity. At my entrance on life I received 
not a nature upright, but one already fallen, and 
that for no fault of mine; stained, and that with 
no sin of mine. And to this nature so weak, so 
fallen, so helpless, come, in every variety, tempta- 
tions, wiles, and allurements such that no man 
has wholly withstood, or can withstand, their 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



35 



subtle power. Now, if this be a part of my pro- 
bation, if it be a path to better things, I can in 
submission — nay, in gladness even — bend to my 
Creator's will: I can take courage, and though 
faint, still pursue the narrow path that leads to 
life. But how can I believe that a loving Creator 
— all powerful as He is all good — does so arrange, 
does so permit, that, for any one soul, this sad and 
fallen estate of human nature shall prove but the 
portal to endless woe? So men reason. I do not 
wonder, I rejoice, that they have ceased to believe, 
that a divine parent can do that, which an earthly 
parent could not do without eternal infamy. For 
next imagine any degree of folly and sin, that 
can stain human nature, to be accumulated on 
the head of some sinful child of man ; and I ask, 
can you believe that any human father, any 
mother, that once loved that child, could bring 
herself calmly to sentence her offspring to an 
endless Hell; nay, herself to keep that child there 
in anguish that never shall terminate? 

Take next a clear exposure of the popular 
creed from another point of view. Look at this 
plain fact. Christ, we know from the Bible is 
the Saviour of the world. He is, therefore, on 
the popular view, the Saviour of those whom in 
fact He does not save. This evidently follows. 
But this principle once admitted, it is wholly 
immaterial, as a matter of reasoning, what the 



36 



THE POPULAR GREED 



percentage of the lost may be. Although out of 
the countless myriads of our race but a few 
hundreds were saved, God would still save every 
man. Indeed, though not even one solitary soul 
were saved, God would still, on the principle 
popularly held, save every man. For that 
principle is this, that to offer salvation, though 
the offer come to nothing, is to save. Hence it 
undoubtedly follows that God might be the 
Saviour of the whole race of men, though not one 
soul were in fact saved. All might be saved on 
this principle, though all were in fact damned ! 

But there is a further difficulty in the way of 
the popular creed . Who are those whom it repre- 
sents as finally unsaved? — the finally impenitent, 
the most obstinate sinners. And what is that but 
to say, in so many words, that those precisely 
whose case furnished the strongest reason for the 
Saviour's mission, are unsaved? Admit their 
guilt, recognise as we do to the very utmost the 
need and the certainty of retribution, the awful 
consequences of sin persisted in, still, when all 
this has been said, it remains true that Christ 
came to! save the " lost," and if so, the more 
" lost " any are, the more Christ came to seek and 
to save them. Thus on the ordinary view, pre- 
cisely those for whom Christ especially came 
receive no salvation, those whose claims are 
strongest perish, those whose claims on a Saviour 
are weakest, are rescued. Let us apply this con- 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



31 



sideration to a plea often used to disguise, if that 
may be, the awful fact of endless torment by 
teaching that but few, comparatively, will share 
this horrible lot. Elsewhere (p. 5), I have shewn 
the futility of this plea, but here I desire to press 
this aspect of the case, that these few are pre- 
cisely those, whose case appeals most of all to a 
Saviour. He came to save sinners (emphati- 
cally sinners). Am I to read the passage thus ? 
— He came to save all sinners except the greatest. 

But further, there is this most grave difficulty ; 
all sin, be it never so black (and God forbid that 
I should even seem to weaken its blackness), is 
but finite. Yet, for these finite sins, you tell me, 
an infinite punishment is the due penalty. But 
finite and infinite are wholly incommensurable 
terms. Have you ever set yourself seriously to 
realise what punishment, protracted for ever and 
ever indeed means ? In fact the idea of illimit- 
able time mocks our utmost efforts to grasp it. 
" The imagination can come to a stand nowhere 
" or ever. On the mind goes, heaping up its 
" millions and billions and quadrillions of 
u millions. It is to no purpose, time without a 
" beginning — -without an end — still confronts it. 
" As thus thought of, the mind recoils from the 
" contemplation, horrified, paralysed with terror. 
If we grasp never so faintly the idea of what an 
infinite punishment means, it becomes clear that 
no proposition more revolting to the idea of 



38 



THE POPULAR CREED 



justice can be stated, than this, that finite sins 
deserve an infinite penalty. Expand the finite 
as you will, and it still falls infinitely short of 
infinity. Hence, it is but the sober statement of 
sober fact, to assert, that a single sentence of un- 
ending torment would outweigh the whole sins 
of the whole human race. To prove this I need 
but assume that, to which every conscience re- 
sponds, that what is finite can in justice receive 
only a finite punishment. But any possible 
number of finite sins put together will still fall 
short (nay, infinitely short) of infinity — of 
infinite guilt.* Add together all sins ever com- 
mitted, be their blackness what it may, be their 
horrors never so great; still the sum of all, because 
the guilt of finite mortals, is but finite, and 
unless all justice is to be outraged, would deserve 
a sentence that, however awful, would be finite. 
Hence it follows that a single sentence of infinite 
misery would, undoubtedly, outweigh, if there be 
such a thing as justice, the sins of all men, who 
have ever lived. 

Further, it is said — for what have not men said, 
at what straw have they not grasped, in vain 
attempts to support a doctrine that each day 
crumbles under their touch ! — it has actually been 

* If, it is said, that there may be some infinite evil in sin, that, 
even if true (which nobody knows and Scripture nowhere teaches), 
does not make human guilt infinite. For on any just principle, 
guilt is determined by the capacities and powers of the agent, and 
all these are in man strictly finite. 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE, 



39 



argued that a sin is infinite, because committed 
against an infinite being : so that, I suppose, to 
rob a nobleman would be a greater crime, morally, 
than to deprive a beggar of his last penny? 

Again, it is said, that perhaps the flames of 
Hell may be needed to terrorize some far distant 
sinful orb ; that rebels against God in some 
other planet, may read, by the light of Hell -fire, 
the dangers of sin. Yes, it has been gravely 
alleged that a Being, whose name is Love, will 
light, and keep alight through unending ages, a 
ghastly living torch for such a purpose as this — 
a torch — each atom of which is composed of a 
lost soul, once His child, once made in His 
image, once redeemed by the Cross of His dear 
Son ! You know this has been taught, and yet 
you actually complain that men are sceptical, and 
that thoughtful artisans reject such a creed with 
scorn. 

And let us not forget how much this belief has 
fostered in man a spirit of cruelty. It is sad, but 
true, to recollect how much of the suffering 
inflicted by man, on his brother man, has been 
due, directly or indirectly, to the belief in Hell. 
How many ghastly fires has it not helped to 
light up here on earth, each containing a living, 
agonizing human being, often thus punished for 
a trifling error in creed? For if men believed 
that God would light up the gloomy fires of Hell 



40 



THE POPULAR CREED 



and keep them blazing to all eternity, it was an 
easy and a natural step, to set up in His name 
a little copy of His justice, and thus, as it were, 
to anticipate God's sentence. " As the souls of 
" heretics are hereafter to be eternally burning in 
" Hell," such was the reasoning of Queen Mary 
in defence of her awfnl persecution, "there can 
" be nothing more proper than for me to imitate 
" the divine vengeance, by burning them here on 
"earth." I say, that however familiar this may 
be, it is necessary to ponder well the sad facts, 
for, by awaking a righteous horror and indigna- 
tion, we may often most effectually combat such 
dogmas. And more must be said, not alone 
have the popular doctrines done all this, but they 
have greatly influenced for evil the general course 
of human legislation, and human thought. You 
may assuredly find traces of the baneful influence 
of a belief in Hell -fire, in a spirit of cruelty 
infused into many laws once current, now, and 
justly, abhorred by all. Nay, it has indeed 
poisoned the very fount of pity and love, by 
representing Him, whose we are, and before 
whom we bow, as calmly looking on, during the 
endless cycles of eternity, at the agony of myriads 
upon myriads of His creatures. 

But further, it must be added, that by this 
shocking creed the moral tone is lowered all round, 
wherever it is accepted. Men are by it familiarized 
with the idea of suffering and sin as permanent 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



41 



facts. They have even in some sort learned to 
consider Heaven as dependant upon the belief 
in an eternal Hell. Nay, I will say, that even 
the holiest men believing the popular creed are 
unconsciously depraved, morally and spiritually. 
You will find for instance, one so holy and so 
revered as Keble, pleading (see hymn for second 
Sunday in Lent) for endless torment, on the ground 
that if this were not true, then endless bliss in 
Heaven would also not be true. To put it 
plainly, he would, as I understand his words, 
purchase Heaven's unending bliss at the terrible 
cost of the endless, hopeless, torture of the lost! 
Here I will onlv say, that I know not whether 
his logic, or his moral tone be more unsound. 
Do but for the moment compare the spirit of 
Keble with, I will not say the spirit of Christ, 
but with that of St. Paul, who wished himself 
accursed from Christ, if thereby he could save 
his brethren ! As to Keble' s argument, that 
will be fully answered in considering, in a later 
chapter, St. Matthew xxv. 46. Meantime, as a 
further illustration, I copy the following from a 
periodical lying before me : — " I was talking the 
" other day with a very learned Catholic ecclesi- 
" astic, who told me that he had been called on 
u to give the last sacraments to a poor Irishman. 
" He found his penitent with some free- thinking 
" friend, who was arguing- that there was no 
" Hell. The dying Celt raised himself up with 
" much indignation; 'no Hell,' he exclaimed, 



42 



THE POPULAR CREED 



a 1 then where is the poor man's consolation ? ' " 

And this difficulty goes farther still : for we 
cannot suppose that the saints in Heaven are 
without any memory of the past. Even Dives, 
in the flames of Hades, remembers with pity his 
brethren. Bat unless you make the impossible 
supposition, that the blessed lose all memory in 
Heaven, then they mast either suffer keenly at 
the thoughts of the torments of the dear ones 
lost in Hell, and tormented for ever and ever: or 
they must be on a lower level, morally and 
spirtually, than was even Dives: choose which 
alternative you please. To this dilemma I see no 
answer. If the blessed sympathise with the 
torments of the lost, can they enjoy even a 
momentary happiness ? If they fail to sympathise, 
are they not sunk in selfishness and debased ? Or 
shall we say that God actually maims His 
redeemed, depriving them of knowledge and 
memory, lest they should miss their lost ones ? 
On this view God's ways are so awful that if 
known they would wither up the very joys of 
Heaven, and so He shuts out pity and wraps the 
blessed in a mantle of selfish ignorance. 

Such is the Heaven of the ordinary creed ; if 
it be not something worse still, an exulting over 
the torments of the lost. To show that this is 
no mere figure of speech, I append a few extracts. 
They are from sources so widely apart as a 
medieval schoolman, and a modern puritan. 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



45 



" That the saints may enjoy their beatitude more 
" thoroughly, and give more abundant thanks for 
" it to God, a perfect sight of the punishment of 
"the damned is granted them." — St. Thomas — 
Summa iii. Take another instance from Peter 
Lombard, " Therefore the elect shall go forth to 
" see the torments of the impious, seeing which 
"they will not be grieved, out will be satiated 
" with joy at the sight of the unutterable calamity 
" of the impious." — Sent en. iv. 50. Again hear 
another from a modern divine, " The view of the 
" misery of the damned will double the ardour of 
" the love and gratitude of the saints in Heaven." 
This is the opinion of the once famous Jonathan 
Edwards. Another American divine uses even 
stronger language. " This display of the divine 
"character," said S. Hopkins, "will be most 
" entertaining to all who love God — will give 
" them the highest and most ine fable pleasure. 
" Should the fire of this eternal punishment cease, 
" it would in a great measure obscure the light of 
" Heaven, and put an end to a great part of the 
" happiness and glory of the blessed." — Works, 
vol. iv. Serm. xiii. To this the popular creed has 
degraded the ministers of Christ, to penning 
passages like the above (easily to be multiplied) 
— passages, than which all literature does not 
contain anything more revolting. I must ask 
you, as a relief from these truly fearful words, 
to read the following touching picture (not this 
time from an ecclesiastical source) : — 



44 



THE POPULAR CREED 



What if a soul redeemed, a spirit that loved 
While yet on earth, and was beloved in turn, 
And still remembered every look and tone 
Of that dear earthly sister, who was left 
Among the unwise virgins at the gate : 
Itself admitted with the bridegroom's train, — 
What if this spirit redeemed, amid the host 
Of chanting angels, in some transient lull 
Of the eternal anthem, heard the cry 
Of its lost darling, whom in evil hour 
Some wilder pulse of nature led astray, 
And left an outcast in a world of fire, 
Condemned to be the sport of cruel fiends, 
Sleepless, unpi tying, masters of the skill 
To wring the maddest ecstasies of pain, 
From worn-out souls that only ask to die, — 
Would it not long to leave the bliss of Heaven, 
Bearing a litttle ivater in its hand, 
To moisten those poor lips that plead in vain, 
With Him we call our Father ? 

0. W. Holmes. — The Poet at the BreaJcfast Table. 

Nor have I yet done with this point. I say 
next that the popular creed does in fact teach 
men to think lightly of sin. This seems a 
paradox, and no doubt you wonder: but consider 
for a moment what the fact is. Tell me, that 
God will permit an eternal Hell, with its miser- 
able population of the lost, to go on sinning to 
all eternity ; and what idea is it you really convey 
to me? It is, I reply, toleration of sin. Have 
you ever thought of this ? " Nothing so effectually 
" teaches men to bear with sin as the popular 
" creed, because we profess to believe that God 
"will bear with it for ever." Further, I say that 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



45 



the practical effect of the ordinary creed is to 
teach men to think lightly of sin in a very large 
class of cases, e.g., where a careless or ungodly life 
has been lived, and no apparent repentance has 
marked the closing scene. For to those who 
believe that the few days or moments remaining 
of life on a sick bed, are the sole period in which 
salvation is possible, how irresistible must be the 
temptation to patch up a hollow peace, to accept 
anything in lieu of a genuine repentance. And 
so not the thoughtless, but teachers grave and holy 
— e.g., Dr. Pusey — do in fact, as they endeavour 
to escape the awful difficulties of the ordinary 
creed, lay stress on the possibility or probability 
of men leading a wicked life, up to the very last 
moment of existence, and in that last moment 
receiving the divine grace. Can any teaching be 
at once more repugnant to all experience, and 
more likely to cause the young and the careless 
to make light of sin? 

On the other hand, it is, I believe, often 
precisely those who most deeply feel the taint 
and evil of sin who reject most completely the 
popular creed; for in proportion to their horror 
at sin, is the depth of their conviction, that sin 
cannot go on for ever. There is, too, this further 
question, if sin is to endure for ever in Hell, must 
it not increase and go on increasing through 
all eternity? Think to what point of horror the 
accumulated sin of the myriads of the lost will 



46 



THE POPULAR CREED 



have reached, when even a few of the cycles of 
eternity are over : and this vast and inconceiv- 
able horror and taint is to go on, and on, and on, 
for ever, and ever, and ever increasing, under the 
rule of Him who is of purer eyes than to behold 
iniquity ! " Think how grotesque a parody of 
" the divine justice it is to say, as the popular 
" creed does, that God requires obedience and 
" righteousness here, but if he cannot have these, 
" He will be satisfied with endless disobedience 
" and sin hereafter as a substitute. We are 
u gravely told that if the wrong be not righted 
" within a specified time, justice will be satisfied 
" to increase the wrong infinitely, and perpetuate 
"it to all eternity." I repeat, that the powers 
of imagination, if taxed to the utmost, could not 
conceive any more ludicrous parody of justice 
than the above ! 

There is again, a difficulty — an impossibility 
rather — in reconciling the popular creed with 
the view, which either Holy Scripture or reason 
give of punishment — its object and nature. 
Apart from all question of its justice — apart, too, 
from the horror it excites — endless, hopeless tor- 
ment, is a useless, and therefore a wanton, inflic- 
tion : it is a mere barbarity, because it is only 
vindictive, and in no sense remedial. There is 
something positively sickening, in the thought of 
the uselessness of penalty prolonged, when all hope 
of amendment is over, and when retribution has 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



47 



been fully exacted. To go on punishing for 
ever, simply for punishment sake, shocks every 
sentiment of justice. And the case is so much 
the worse when, as remarked, the punishment is 
really the prolongation of sin, when it is but 
keeping evil alive, making sin endless. 

But punishment is, on any true theory, no less 
remedial than vindictive, nay, is essentially 
remedial and corrective. Our day has seen a 
complete revolution in the ideas men form of 
punishment and its end: in few things has 
the advance been more marked over the past, 
than in our recognition of the true object 
of penalty. Not that mere pain is looked on as 
necessarily remedial, but with the penalty, we 
now seek to combine corrective influences; the 
whole spirit of punishment has been altered with 
the change in men's minds, and a higher tone 
now everywhere prevails. But let me ask, to 
whom is due this marked change for the better, 
in our ideas of punishment ? Surely to that 
Great Being who guides and orders by His 
providence all human things! This being so, 
it is wholly incredible to assign to the divine 
punishments, this very character of mere vin- 
dictiveness, which men have in all enlightened 
systems abandoned. This is, I repeat, impossible 
to believe, for when God chastises it is for our 
profit, as the Bible says. He punishes, as an old 
Father puts it. medicinally. Yes, it is impossible 



48 



THE POPULAR GREED 



to believe the ordinary dogma, for if God does 
indeed by His providence — by His Spirit — direct 
and enlighten men's minds, leading them to 
higher and truer thoughts on this subject (as on 
all others), then to suppose that His own 
punishments are regulated on the very system, 
which He has taught us to abandon, is truly 
impossible. 

Nor can I close this subject without remarking 
that there is a highly significant expression found 
in that very passage, most often on the lips of 
the defenders of endless pain, which yet, curiously 
enough, furnishes the material for an answer to 
their creed: I speak of St Matthew xxv. 46. The 
term there applied to the punishment of the 
ungodly is not the ordinary Greek word to 
denote penalty, but it is a term (Kolasis) denoting, 
literally, pruning, i.e., a corrective chastisement — 
an age-long (but reformatory) punishment. 
Surely the choice of this particular word, to 
designate the future suffering of the ungodly, is 
full of significance: unless, indeed, any one 
should prefer to think that chance dictated its 
selection in this inspired sentence. Nor is this 
to deny the retributive character of punishment. 
It is merely to assert, that while punishment is 
truly retributive, its paramount end is not this, 
but the higher aim of amending by chastisement. 
(See the remarks on God's judgments in chapter 
ix.) 



CHAPTER III. 

« THE POPULAR CREED WHOLLY UNTENABLE. " 

" Far be it from me to make light of the demerit of sin. But endless 
"punishment — I admit my inability (I would say it reverently) to 
" admit this belief together with a belief in the Divine goodness — 
' ' the belief that God is Love, that His tender mercies are over all 
" His works." — John Foster on Future Punishment. 

Pursuing our remarks, I must also remind you 
of another feature of the popular belief, which 
seems to present a great difficulty ; it is what I 
must call its paltriness, its poorness. Let us for 
the moment, not think of God as a good, loving, 
and righteous Being. Let us now simply regard 
Him as great, as irresistible, as almighty. Viewed 
thus, how difficult is it to accept that account 
which the ordinary creed gives us of this Being's 
attempt at the rescue of His fallen creature man. 
An Almighty Being puts forth every effort to 
gain a certain end ; sends inspired men to teach 
others : works miracles, signs, wonders in Heaven 
and on earth, all for this end of man's safety ; 
nay, at the last, sends forth His own Son — very 
God — Himself Almighty. The Almighty Son 
stoops not alone to take our nature on Him, but 



50 



THE POPULAR CREED 



lower still — far lower — stoops to degradation ; 
meekly accepts insult and scourging, bends to the 
bitter cross even, and all this to gain a certain 
end. And yet, they tell us, this end is not gained 
after all, man is not saved, for countless myriads 
are in fact left to hopeless, endless misery; and 
that though for every one of these lost ones, so to 
speak, has been shed the life blood of God's own 
Son. Now, if I may be permitted to speak freely, 
it is wholly inconceivable that the definite plan of 
an Almighty Being should end in failure — that this 
should be the result of the agony of the eternal 
Son. 

And continue this thought If we think of 
God at all worthily, we cannot help thinking of 
Him as working for high and worthy ends. 
Therefore we cannot help thinking of Him, as in 
creation, working for some end worthy of Him- 
self. But ' what end does the popular creed 
assign to Him? A creation, broken, marred, 
mutilated, ruined, and so to continue for ever. A 
creation ending in misery, pain, woe unutterable, 
to infinite numbers of the created ; and all this 
misery and horror brought into sharper relief by 
a vain and fruitless attempt to save all : by a 
purpose of love declared to all, and yet not in fact 
reaching all : a creation which is the portal for 
one half, or more of the created to Hell ! And 
you gravely ask thoughtful enquirers, to believe 
this ; to believe that for such an end, and con- 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE, 



51 



templating these horrors destined never to cease, 
the morning stars are described as singing 
together, and all the sons of God shouting for joy 
on the morning of creation. 

The sons of God shouted for joy, aa they con- 
templated creation ; but they should have wept 
had the popular creed been true. For that 
creed represents the present life as darkened by 
the prospect of evil triumphant ; our present 
sorrows made keener by the prospect of a future 
life, which will be, not to the wicked merely, but 
to the whole race of man, an evil and a curse — 
a life which every good man would, if he could, 
bring to an instant end. To prove this, I will 
take a definite example. Further, I will concede 
to the advocates of the popular creed one point 
of very considerable importance (to which they 
have no right) e.g.-, that the number of the saved 
greatly exceeds the lost. "Suppose it were offered 
u to the father of three children to take his choice 
" whether two should be received into heaven, 
" and one condemned to hell, or the whole should 
" be annihilated in death. What would a parent 
" say ? Where is the father who would dare to 
u secure the bliss of two children at the cost 
" of the endless misery of one ? Which of the 
" family would he select as the victim, whose 
" undying pain should secure his brothers' im- 
" mortal joy? Is there any one living who 
n would not suffer himself and his children to 



52 



THE POPULAR CREED 



" sink back again into nothingness rather than 
" purchase heaven at such a price ? Now if so, 
" if we should so act in the case of our own 
" children, we are bound morally to make the 
" same choice with respect to every one. No 
" moral being would consent to purchase eternal 
" happiness at the price of another's eternal woe. 
" Hence it follows that a future life, on the 
" popular view, is an evil to the human race, 
" not to the wicked, but to all. For if annihilation 
" of the whole race should be tendered as the 
" alternative, no moral being could, as has been 
" shewn, refuse to accept it. — Barlow on 
Eternal Punishment. 

Thus, there is, I repeat, if the popular creed be 
true, no alternative, no escape from the conclusion 
that creation is an evil thing, and a future life a 
curse to the whole human family. What is to be 
our answer to the scorn of the Sceptic, to the 
challenge of the Atheist ? So long as we cling to 
an immoral creed there is none, absolutely none. 
What awful mockery is a Gospel whose message 
is, in fact, damnation to countless myriads ! 
whose issue is endless sin, sin ever ripening, 
ever progressing ! And I am to preach such a 
Gospel as good news ! as glad tidings of great 
joy ! ! glad tidings of never ending sin and woe 
and j)ain and curse ! ! 

But again, there comes this very serious 
obstacle to accepting the popular creed. I shall 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



53 



state it thus, either this creed is true or false. If 
false — the question is ended. If true, can you 
explain to me this strange fact, that nobody acts 
as if he believed it? I say this, for any man 
who so believed, and who possesed but a spark of 
common humanity — to say nothing of charity — ■ 
could not rest, day or night, so long as one sinner 
remained who might be saved. To this all would 
give place : pleasure, learning, business, art, 
literature; nay, life itself would be too short for 
the terrible warnings, the burning entreaties, 
the earnest pleadings, that would be needed to 
rouse sinners from their apathy, and to pluck 
them from endless tortures. Ask me what you 
will, but do not ask me to believe that any human 
being, who is convinced, that perhaps his own 
child, his wife, his friend, his neighbour even, is in 
danger of endless torment, could, if really per- 
suaded of this, live as men now live, even the 
best men. Who can avoid the inevitable con- 
clusion that its warmest adherents really, though 
unconsciously, find their dogmas absolutely 
incredible ? These remarks explain an obvious 
difficulty, viz. — it has been shewn how the 
popular creed cuts at the root of all religion, 
poisoning the very fountains whence we draw 
our conceptions of love, of righteousness, of 
truth (pp. 15 — 20), But if so, it may be fairly 
asked, how is it that society subsists, that 
morality is not extinct? Because, I reply, 
unhesitatingly, because no society, no individual, 



54 



THE POPULAR CREED 



can possibly act, or has in fact acted on such a 
creed, in the real business of life. It is simply 
impossible: who would dare so much as to smile, 
if he really believed endless torments were certain 
to be the portion of some member of his house- 
hold — it may be of himself? Who would 
venture to marry less he might become the 
parent of children who should incur this 
unspeakable doom? "The world would be one 
"vast madhouse" says the American scholar 
Hallsted, " if a realising and continued pressure 
" of such a doctrine was present." Remark 
again how this doctrine breaks down the moment 
it is really put to the test. Take a common case: 
a man dies — active, benevolent, useful in life, but 
not a religious man, not devout. By the popular 
creed, such a man has gone to Hell for ever. But 
who really believes that ? nay, instinctively our 
words grow softer when we speak of the dead in 
all cases. 

Let me next point out a practical difficulty of 
the gravest kind which arises on the popular view. 
It is this : how can you on any such principle 
deal fairly or equitably with the mass of men ? 
Let us speak plainly : do tell me who and what 
are the great, na} T , the overwhelming majority of 
the baptized ? They are assuredly neither wholly 
bad, nor wholly good ; they are neither bad 
enough for Hell, nor good enough for Heaven. 
Now how can you adopt your theory to this state 



WHOLL Y UNTENABLE. 55 



of things, which is, I think, quite impossible to 
deny? Look around you, survey the mass of 
mankind : of how few, how very few can you 
affirm that they are truly devout, converted, holy, 
Christ-like ; take which term you please. Can 
you affirm this of one in ten ; in twenty ; in a 
hundred even, of those baptized into Jesus 
Christ? Take as an illustration any English 
parish you please. Take its entire population, 
what are they, how many are the really good? 
Take any village, or select some one of our 
English towns, muster its whole population in 
imagination, how many true, holy servants of 
Jesus Christ will you find there ? The mass, 
what are they? Do meet this question, and look 
the facts straight in the face. What is to be the 
doom of the mass of baptized Christians — they 
are not holy, but are they bad ? Nobody out of 
the pulpit — and seldom there in these days — 
ventures to assert any such thing. Indeed there 
is abundant good in this crowd of human beings, 
and still more, there is almost infinite capacity 
for goodness, amid the evil. Everywhere you 
w T ill find unselfish parents, hard workers, loving 
sisters, true friends ; everywhere traces, distinct 
enough amid all the sin, traces in abundance, of 
goodness, kindness, patience, self-sacrifice, some- 
times carried even to great lengths. Let an 
emergency arise, let sickness come, what devotion 
does it not call forth — what love unstinted, what 
self-forgetfulness ? Now your system, that which 



56 



THE POPULAR CREED 



you call the good news brought from Heaven by 
Jesus Christ, forces you to believe that God 
will consign all these hapless children of His, 
because unconverted, and unrenewed, to a doom 
which in its lightest form is awful beyond all 
powers of imagination ; to the company of devils 
for ever and ever; to darkness unbroken by a 
single ray of light. Permit me one question 
more, would not any creed, anything, be a positive 
relief from such a gospel as this of yours? Can 
there be a mockery more solemn, more emphatic, 
than to call this any part of the glad tidings of 
great joy ? Is it not time for the clergy, not 
merely in private to ponder these things, con- 
vinced or half convinced of their truth, but to 
speak out as in God's name — as God's ministers ? 

And while I am speaking of men as they are, 
and of the life they lead, let me add here a 
statement of another very grave difficulty in the 
way of accepting an endless Hell as the doom of 
any man, the issue of any life. Wherever human 
beings exist, in what form of community it 
matters not, in what climate or under what con- 
ditions of life soever, there is found everywhere 
a deep spontaneous belief, call it feeling, instinct, 
what you please, that connects the marriage tie 
and the birthday with joyful associations, with 
mirth and gladness. Now why is this— has it 
no meaning ? So deep an instinct, one so truly 
natural and spontaneous as this, comes surely from 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



51 



the Creator of all. His voice it is that bids the 
Bridegroom rejoice over the Bride, that bids the 
heart of the mother overflow with tenderness 
towards her babe. This being so, again let me 
put the question, and ask, why has this been so 
ordered ? It is God who has so ordered ; do you 
think He has had no purpose in so doing, no 
message to convey to those who have ears ' to 
hear? Is it possible that our Heavenly Father 
should bid His creatures everywhere to rejoice 
with a special joy at the marriage feast, at the 
natal hour, if these births were in fact destined 
to add largely to the ranks of Hell, to the hosts 
of evil ? Do think over the matter calmly, and 
ask yourself if that is possible, if you can believe 
anv such thin^. 

And as you think it over, take with you these 
words of Jesus Christ (that hint so much). 
They remind us how the mother, in the " perilous 
"birth" hath sorrow; but add that all that 
sorrow is swallowed up in joy, "joy that a man 
" is born into the world." Dwell on these words 
that you may grasp all they, convey. Indeed in 
this lies the whole matter. It is a joy that a man 
— any man — should be born into the world. See 
how wide the words are ! If you tell me, it is but 
a blind instinct of the mother: yes, I reply, it is 
this very blindness, as you call it, of the instinct 
that constitutes its force, for it thus betrays its 
origin ; it is implanted ; and by whom ? by the 



58 



TEE POPULAR CREED 



Great Parent, for it is spontaneous and betrays 
His hand. Do you ask me to believe that He has 
done this without a meaning, without a certain 
purpose of good ? Can I believe that our Father 
bids any mother's heart to stir with joy at the 
sight of her infant, while He knows that this 
infant is destined to be, will be, in fact, shut up 
into endless torment ? 

And again, can you reconcile your theory of 
endless torment awaiting so large a portion of our 
race, with that natural thirst for joy, that longing 
for happiness each one finds within. It matters 
not whether this has been slowly developed, or 
created at one stroke, all that matters to this 
argument is its naturalness, its universality . This 
longing for happiness cannot then have been 
accidental, there must be in it a design on the 
Creator's part. Now, do say what that design 
can have been ? To delude us, is that possible ? 
"If the popular theory of future endless torment 
" were true, what sublime mockery would there 
" be in placing poor wretches first upon earth, 
" where are heard the merry shouts of careless 
" children, the joyous song of birds, where above 
" our heads, 

' With constant kindly smile the sleepless stars, 
' Keep everlasting watch * * 

"where beneath our feet the delicate beauty of 
" flowers of every tint gladdens the eye. What 
" would have been thought of the propriety of 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



59 



" placing a hundred bright and cheerful objects, 
" suggestive of peace and happiness, in the ante- 
" room to the torture chamber of the inquisition ? 
"It deserves to be noted that man, the only 
"animal that laughs, has of all animals, according 
<c to the popular theory, least cause to laugh." 

But there is much to be said beyond remarking 
on our natural thirst, for joy and happiness, 
and the difficulty of explaining why it was ever 
implanted in man, except with a design that it 
should one day be gratified, fully and freely. 
There is this to be said, there is stored in everj 
man a vast possibility of growth, of expansion, 
mental and intellectual, no less than spiritual. 
There are almost infinite germs in man, so to speak; 
capacities of every sort, latent as yet, but capable 
of a development, perhaps practically boundless, 
stored now up within us : they are probably 
unsuspected by the majority, and it is only at 
intervals, and as it were by chance, that we gain 
a passing glance at them. But undoubtedly they 
exist, and their existence, like that of all other 
natural facts, requires an explanation. Why do 
they exist — who planted within us these powers, 
and for what end ? And they have been given to 
all, not to the good merely, but to man as man. 
I cannot but see in the very fact of their existence 
a silent prophecy, an intimation that the spark 
shall not be quenched in any case. Are they not 
a very message to man from God, a hint, eloquent 



CO 



THE POPULAR CREED 



by its very silence, eloquent, and instinct with 
hope ? 

Consider next, how strongly the analogy of 
nature, which is, after all, a very real revelation of 
God, hears against the popular view, which limits 
to the few moments of our present life all our 
chances of discipline, amendment, and probation; 
and that though "all reason, all experience, all 
" scripture, unite in this, that the Divine work of 
" teaching goes on behind, as well as before, the 
" veil." To teach that the mere fact of dying 
is the signal for a total change from all that has 
gone before, is to contradict all that we know of 
God's ways from analogy. Consider this and 
say whether any view which interposes so wide a 
gulf, as that commonly held does, between our 
present and our future life, can be true. In 
all God's dealings with us no sharp break inter- 
venes between the successive stages of life : each 
condition of being is developed out of a prior, 
and closely related stage. STow this being so, 
can I believe that in another age all this is 
reversed, and that men, with ample capacities for 
good still existing, are to be at one bound, con- 
signed to outer darkness, to hopeless sin, to 
endless torture? And the difficulty (surely an 
enormous one) of believing that a Parent will 
deliberately crush out all the lingering tendencies 
to good in His own children, is increased by the 
following consideration, viz.: — that the whole of 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



61 



our human life here is so manifestly incomplete, 
so incohate, that in very many cases, it has not 
afforded a satisfactory probation, and in not 
a few cases, no probation at all. 

This thought may be pursued further thus: 
an old proverb says very wisely, " the mills of 
" God grind slowly" and this Divine slowness, or 
long suffering is very conspicuous in God's ways. 
How slowly has He been fitting this earth for 
man's habitation, and by what a long continued 
succession of stages, age succeeding age. At 
length man steps on the earth. Now, is all the 
Divine slowness to be at once changed — and why 
should it be ? Man is to live for ever and ever: 
we are apt to forget what this means, and how 
altogether impossible it is to assign any propor- 
tion between the fleeting moments of earthly life, 
and the eternity that stretches awa} r , for ever and 
ever. If we compare a human life of average 
duration to one second of time, and compare 
eternity to the aggregate of all the seconds that 
have passed since time was, and that shall pass 
while time endures, still we assign to human life 
a proportionate duration infinitely too long. Am 
I then to believe that the same God who expends 
millions of years, in slowly fitting this earth for 
man's habitation, will only allow to man himself 
a few fleeting years, or months, or hours, as it 
may be, as his sole preparation time for eternity? 
To settle questions so unspeakably great in their 



THE POPULAR CREED 



issue, questions, stretching away to a horizon 
so far distant, that no power of thought can 
follow them, in such hot haste, does seem quite 
at variance with our Heavenly Father's ways, 
with all He has shewn us of His modes of acting. 
Besides, do but look at the world : far the larger 
part of its population has not even heard of 
Jesus Christ. Are they — these untold myriads 
of myriads of hapless creatures — first to hear of 
Christ at the Day of J udgment ? 

Finally we pass to Holy Scripture. Here we 
are at once confronted by a difficulty, so grave, 
that I confess, it to me seems quite decisive 
against the popular view. This difficulty is, that 
you are thus forced absolutely to ignore, to 
suppress a very large part of the Bible: a very 
numerous class of passages which clearly hold out 
a promise of universal restitution, or at least 
imply a distinct hope for all men. The view 
generally held is, in short, one-sided, and therefore 
wholly unfair : it is as though a judge should base 
a decision of the most weighty importance on one 
set of witnesses merely, neglecting the others 
who testify in a directly opposite sense. " Only 
"imagine the book of nature being studied in 
"this way, with one class of facts systematically 
■" ignored ; with one law, say of gravitation, fully 
" laid down, while the opposite law of centrifugal 
" motion was altogether overlooked, what results 
"in science could follow from such a method? 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



OS 



"Yet this is the way in which not a few yet read 
" the Scriptures, taking their first partial sense 
" readings for the truth, and shutting their eyes 
" to all that the same Scripture testifies on the 
"other side." 

An interesting illustration of the fact that the 
New Testament is full of passages teaching the 
larger hope, is furnished by the undoubted, but 
often unperceived, occurrence over and over again, 
in the works of those who hold the popular creed, 
of language, which if fairly understood, imports 
the salvation of all men. This no doubt arises 
from the fact that phrases are used freely, while 
a traditional creed does, as so often, blind men to 
the real force of the expressions they employ — 
blind them in fact to everything outside the line 
of thought, which they are taught to believe con- 
stitutes the truth. Perhaps the best illustration 
that can be given of what I mean, will be gained 
by quoting from some collection of popular 
Hymns. I take then the well-known Hymns, 
Ancient and Modern, and quote a few passages 
as instances of my meaning. Hymn 45 has this 
verse : — 

" Thou, sorrowing at the helpless cry, 

" Of all creation doomed to die, 

" Did'st save our lost and guilty race." 

But this is universal salvation : the race of man 
saved, if words have any meaning. And this 



64 



THE POPULAR CREED 



thought — the race saved — finds frequent expres- 
sion elsewhere in these Hymns ; nor let any man 
who regards honesty of speech, and common 
truthfulness, say that to offer salvation merely, 
is, or can be, the same thing as to save. See 
Hymns 56, v. 3, 4, 5, 6 ; 57, v. 3 ; 62, v. 2, 6 ; 
200, v. 6, etc. Again, listen to these solemn 
words and tell me what they mean. Hymn 97, 
Part 2, v. 2 :— 

44 Precious flood which all creation, 
" From the stain of sin hath freed." 

And again v. 5 : — 

44 That a shipwrecked race for ever 
14 Might a port of refuge gain." 

And Hymn 103, v. 5 :— 

44 So a ransomed world shall ever 
44 Praise Thee its redeeming Lord," 

Can it be right to talk of a ransomed world for 
ever praising its Redeemer, and yet to mean that 
all the time the world is not actually ransomed, 
and perhaps half, perhaps more, of its population 
are groaning in endless pain ? Is this consistent 
w T ith truth? Again, other hymns call on all 
creation to sing God's praise. Shall this praise 
then echo from Hell? See as a specimen, 
Hymns 144, v. 3 and 6, and 299, v. 4. etc., etc. 
I might well quote, in proof of this address to 
all creation to praise God, the familiar Doxology. 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



65 



but I will only notice here a well known Hymn, 
Mo. 222 :— ' 

" O day for which creation, 

" And all its tribes were made ; 

" 0 joy for all its former woes, 

" A thousand times repaid." 

Now I will simply ask what these words mean : 
all creation is to have all its woes a thousand 
times repaid : if this is not universalism, what is 
universalism ? Again, over and over, Christ is 
said to have vanquished sin, death, and Satan: — 
Hymns, 147, v. 2 ; 148, v. 2 ; 196, v. 3, etc. 
But how can this be true on the popular creed ? 
To say, that sin is vanquished, and death and 
Satan, while Hell receives its myriads of the lost, 
is worse than absurd; e.g., take this line from 
Hymn, No. L96 : — 

"Death of death, and Hell's destruction," 

and say if the universalist's creed could be more 
distinctly stated : his utmost hopes have never 
gone beyond a vision of death abolished, and Hell 
destroyed ? To pursue this further is needless, 
though it would be easy, and indeed full of 
interest : but I may point out how significant it 
is, to find the very opponents of the larger hope 
fo?*ced, unconsciously, to employ language directly 
teaching universal salvation. The explanation is 
simply, that they have been using the words and 
ideas of Scripture, while the fair, honest, meaning 
of their own words is obscured for them, by the 
spell of a narrow traditional creed. 



6G 



THE POPULAR CREED 



Before passing on let me remark once more on 
the injurious moral tendency of the popular 
creed. Not merely has it fostered in man a 
spirit of cruelty (p. 39) — not alone does it 
promise a heaven which is one of utter selfish- 
ness (p. 42 ) — not merely does it point to evil 
as finally triumphant (p. 31 — 2), but it scatters 
broadcast, lessons of equivocation and untruth. 
For if to say one thing, while meaning something 
totally different, be falsehood, then with false- 
hood is the popular religious literature honey- 
combed from end to end! Everywhere it 
repeats that the race of man is saved, that Christ 
is the Saviour of mankind, while it really means 
that half mankind is damned. It tells us, I quote 
the Record, (Easter, 1885) — how " Satan is utterly 
" subdued," u his empire completely demolished, " 
" his power for ever fallen." This teaching it 
repeats in a thousand forms, in countless hymns, 
in sermons, tracts, books ; but it really means 
that Satan is triumphant, and his empire as 
enduring as God himself. Well may the 
sceptic exult, and the thoughtful Christian 
mourn at this duplicity, which stains our religious 
literature, this terrible perversion, in the holiest 
matters, of those words by which we shall be 
judged. 

Again, there are, apart from all these 
passages, certain tendencies in the Gospel, whose 
drift and character are impossible to mistake. 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



07 



That these tendencies exist I am far more certain 
than I can be of the meaning of an} r number of 
highly figurative texts. Now these tendencies 
are too clear, too broad, too distinct, to be con- 
sidered accidental. So far from being a product 
of the age in which the New Testament was 
written, they are in conflict with the spirit of that 
age, and in advance of it. They must therefore 
represent something inherent in the Author of 
Christianity, and something essential to His 
design. I put the case very moderately in saying, 
how extremely difficult it is to reconcile the 
popular creed, with these undoubted tendencies 
of the New Testament. Can I reasonably believe 
that a system which, beyond all other creeds, has 
been distinguished by promoting mercy, goodness, 
love, tenderness for body and soul ; a system, of 
which these qualities are the very essence, does 
indeed teach a doctrine of punishment so shocking, 
so horrible, that if really believed, it would turn 
this earth into a charnel-house, and spread over 
all nature lamentation, mourning, and woe? 

Let me next shew that certain great principles 
of Revelation conflict with the popular creed. 
" I am sure," says a thoughtful writer, " these 
" are the two fundamental features of the 
" Christian Revelation, of which all its utterances 
"are the manifold expression, viz.: — 1. — The 
" parental love of the Father. 2. — The 
" solidaritv of mankind to be conformed to the 



68 



THE POPULAR CREED 



"image of His Son." — Letters from a Mystic. 
1. — No one can deny that the New Testament 
contains a special revelation of the parental tie 
uniting us to God. When we pray and say, " our 
Father " these two words convey the spirit of 
the whole Gospel. Now it is not too much to 
assert that the view generally held is an absolute 
negation of all that the parental tie implies. It 
robs the relation of all meaning. It reduces to 
a simple mockery the divine fatherhood, though 
that is of the very essence of Christianity. 

I repeat, the essence of Christianity perishes in 
the virtual denial of any true fatherhood of our 
race on God's part. Follow out this thought, 
for it is of primary importance. We lose sight 
of the value of the individual soul, when dealing 
with the countless millions, who have peopled 
this earth, and passed away. What is one 
among so many? we are tempted to say, for- 
getting that the value of each human being is 
not in the least thereby altered : each soul is 
of infinite value, as if it stood alone, in the eyes 
of God its Father. And more than this, are we 
not altogether apt to forget another vital point, 
to forget whose the loss is, if any one soul 
perishes ? it is the man's own loss, says our 
popular creed. But is this all ? No, a thousand 
times no ! It is God's loss: it is the Father who 
loses His child. The straying sheep of the 
parable is the Great Shepherd's loss: the missing 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



00 



coin is the owner's loss. In this very fact lies 
the pledge that He will seek on and on till He 
find it. For only think of the value He sets on 
each soul. He has stamped each with His own 
image: has conferred on each a share of * His 
own immortality — of Himself : do but realize 
these things ; put them into plain words, till 
you come thoroughly to believe them ; and you 
must see how impossible it becomes to credit 
that unworthy theology, which tells you that 
such a Father can ever let perish the work of 
His own fingers, His own offspring. One step 
further to make this clearer: how has He shown 
His sense of the value of the human spirit? 
The Incarnation must say. It is human life 
taken into closest alliance with the divine, man 
and God meeting in the God -max. And then 
follows the Atonement, proof on proof of the same 
truth, when He tasted death for every man, He 
in whose death all died. Such is the chain, 
whose golden links I have been endeavouring to 
follow and trace, whose links bind to the Father 
above every human soul ; every human soul, be 
it distinctly affirmed. Or stay, is there not yet 
wanting the final link to complete this chain? 
It is to be found in the great truth, which com- 
pletes what I have been saying ; the truth of the 
Oneness of the human race, its organic unity. 
Let us consider this. 



2. The principle of the organic unity of our 



70 



THE POPULAR CREED 



race is very legible in the divinely -given 
symbolism of the old law, and is reflected in the 
gospel with perfect clearness. What but this is 
the teaching of the " first fruits," and the " first 
" born " in Scripture? These imply and include, 
the one, the whole harvest ; the other, the whole 
family, and not less. Now Christ is the " first 
fruits." — 1 Cor. xv., 23, and Christ is the 
" first-born." — Col. i., 18. And what follows let 
St. Paul say, " If the first "fruit be holy the 
"lump is also holy," the whole race. Thus this 
principle is affirmed in the great central doctrine 
of the Incarnation. For in Christ the first-fruits, 
mankind, i.e.,- the aggregate of humanity, is taken 
into God. And so in his death all died, as 
the New Testament assures us, and in His 
resurrection all rise, nay, are risen. In other 
words, Christ's relation, as the second Adam, is 
not to individuals, but to the race ; further it 
is an actual, not a possible or a potential relation, 
an actual relation giving salvation to all. " Once 
"introduce the belief in Christ's divine nature, 
" and His death and resurrection are no longer 
" of the individual, but of the race. It was on 
" this belief the Church was founded, and built 
" up. The belief was not indeed drawn out with 
" exact precision, yet it was always implied in 
" the relation, which the believer was supposed 
" to hold toward God. The formula of Baptism 
" which has never changed, is unintelligible with- 
" out it. The Eucharist is emptied of the 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



71 



" blessing which every age has sought in that 
" Holy Sacrament, if it be taken away. If Christ 
" took our nature upon Him, as we believe, by 
" an act of love, it was not that of one, but of all. 
" He was not one man only among men, but in 
" Him all humanity are gathered up : and thus 
" now as at all time, mankind are, so to speak, 
" organically united with himT — Wescott, Gospel 
of the Resurrection^. 176. And this union of the 
race of man with Himself, it is that Jesus Christ 
would teach in one of His many pregnant hints, 
by always speaking of Himself in His redeem- 
ing work, as the Son, not of the Jew, not of the 
Gentile, not of Mary, not of the carpenter, but 
the Son of Man, 

Yes, the organic unity of mankind is a 
principle that from the fall to the story of the 
Incarnation, runs through the texture of Holy 
Scripture. Have you ever quietly thought 
over the very strange fact of what is called original 
sin ? Have you asked yourself what it 
means, that you are suffering for something done 
thousands of years before your birth? The 
questions raised by this enquiry we need not try 
to settle, but we may say that it means at least 
this, that in the divine plan the race falls and rises 
together ; that mankind is not a collection of 
separate units, but an organised whole. Each 
individual is not, so to speak, complete in himself, 
but is a living stone in the sreat building, is a 



7.2 



THE POPULAR CREED 



member of one great body, a member that if 
withdrawn, there would ensue a distinct loss to 
the whole, a mutilation in fact of the body. And 
so Adam's sin sent a shock through the whole 
body, exactlj as when a hurt to any part sends 
a shock through our present body. This is the 
painful side, but it is only one side ; and unfortu- 
nately the popular creed, as so often, persists in 
looking at one side only, and that the dark side, 
and in looking away from the bright side, or at 
least in so looking at it, as to miss its real aspect. 
But here the New Testament comes to our rescue 
and assures us that ' 4 if in Adam all die, so in the 
"second Adam all shall be made alive." The 
race is fallen ; true, but the race is risen ; quite 
as true. Both facts strictly correspond ; 

" Of two such lessons why forget 

" The nobler and the Christlier one ? " 

A partial salvation is thus in absolute conflict 
with this fundamental principle which the fall 
affirms, and to which the Incarnation testifies ; 
the unity of mankind, its Oneness. A partial 
salvation is thus in direct opposition to the great 
truth put by St. Paul so clearly. " If through the 
" offence of one (the) many be dead, much more 
" the grace of God, and the gift of grace, which 
" is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded 
"unto (the) many * * as by the offence of one, 
" j udgement came upon all men to condemnation, 
" even so by the righteousness of one. the free 
" gift came upon unto all men unto justification of 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE, 



73 



" life." Observe, the offence is a thing actually 
imparted to, actually staining, ruining all men. 
And Jesus Christ came to bring to every man, 
to humanity, a salvation which shall be to man- 
kind much more than the fall. But the popular 
view reads much less ; and in millions of cases, as 
much less as Hell is less than Heaven. 

But again, the view generally held conflicts 
with another great principle, viz. : — the unchange- 
ableness of God. " If God be unchangeable, then 
u what we see of Him at any moment, must be 
" true of Him at every moment of time, true ot 
" Him also both before and after all the moments 
" of time ; always and for ever true of Him. If 
" His purpose be to save mankind, that purpose 
" stands firm for ever, unaffected by man's sin, 
" unshaken by the fact of death, unaltered and 
" unalterable by men, by angels, by aught con- 
ceivable. — Salvator Mundi,p. 158. Redemption 
is no after-thought, it was planned in the full 
knowledge of all the extent of man's sin: knowing 
all, God declared his purpose to be to save the 
race. Redemption then is something indefeasible, 
except indeed God can change, or man be 
stronger than God, or the will of the created 
stronger than the will of the Creator. 11 The 
" gifts and calling of God are without repen- 
" tance." — Rom. xi., 29. That is, what God gives 
cannot be refused, whom God calls, they must 
be saved. And this unchangeable purpose of 



74 



THE POPULAR CREED 



God is stated afresh in the words that describe 
Jesus Christ as " the same yesterday, to-day, 
" and for ever " (for the ages) — words deeply 
significant, and yet, whose true teaching so very 
often escapes attention. 

And here let me close this part of my argu- 
ment by introducing a story, for whose truth 
I vouch, to show how practical these considera- 
tions really are. In a certain quarter of London, 
one of the many evangelists, employed for 
that purpose, had gone forth to preach to the 
people. When he had concluded an eloquent 
address, he was thus accosted by one of his 
hearers : — " Sir," said the man, "may I ask 
" you one or two questions ?" " Surely," said the 
Preacher. " You have told us, that God's 
" love for us, is very great and very strong." 
" Yes." " That He sent His Son on purpose 
" to save us, and that I may be saved this 
" moment, if I will." " Yes." " But, that if I go 
" away without an immediate acceptance of this 
" offer, and if a few minutes after I were to 
"be by any accident, killed on my way home, 
" I should find myself in Hell for ever and ever." 
" Yes." " Then," said the man, " if so, I don't 
" want to have anything to do with a Being 
" whose love for me can change so completely in jive 
" minutes." 

" God so loved the world " — Has He ceased to 
love it ? If so, when ? " love is not love that 



WHOLLY UNTENABLE. 



alters, where it alteration finds/' even human 
love, if true, never changes. Yet this love is 
but a faint, far off, reflection of our Father's love. 
God is not love and justice, or love and anger. 
He is love, i.e., love essential. Therefore His 
wrath is but a mode of His love. His venge- 
ance is but love in action. To say that God 
cannot change, is to say that His love cannot 
change. Hence His love being changeless, 
pursues the sinner to the outer darkness, and 
draws him thence. An earthly parent, who, being 
able to help, should sit unmoved, month after 
month, year after year, watching, but never help- 
ing, the agonies of his own offspring, is a picture 
more hideous than any the records of crime can 
furnish. What shall we say to those who 
heighten enormously, infinitely, all that is 
shocking in such a picture, until its blackest 
details become light itself ; and then tell us that 
the parent in this ghastly scene is one who is 
love, love infinite, almighty, and our Father ? 

Finally, what graver fact can be stated than 
this, that a partial salvation aims a blow at both 
the Incarnation, and the Atonement ? Of the 
Incarnation I have briefly spoken, and have 
shewn that its central idea is the taking of the 
race of man, as an indivisible whole, into God 
through Jesus Christ, the second Adam. But 
with this fundamental idea, a partial salvation is 
in hopeless contradiction. Not less vital is the 



76 



THE POPULAR CREED. 



blow aimed by the popular creed at the Atone- 
ment, for that creed virtually teaches (p. 32) that 
the Cross is a stupendous failure. This is easily 
shown. For plainly that which misses its end is 
a failure. And if the end aimed at be noble, then 
in proportion is the failure greater and vital. 
But the Scriptural evidence is overwhelming, 
that the object of Christ's death was to save 
the ivorld. " The Father sent the Son to be the 
" Saviour of the world." He came "that the 
" world through Him might be saved." If then 
this end be not gained, if the world be not in fact 
saved, the Atonement is a failure. Disguise the 
fact as, men may, the dilemma is inevitable. 
Answer or evasion, there is none. I press this 
point (which may fitly close these chapters), that 
to teach in any form, under any modification, a 
partial salvation, is to aim a blow at the Cross 
and Passion of our Lord : it is to strike at the 
Incarnation, and Atonement, and through them, 
at the whole scheme of salvation. 



CHAPTER IV. 



" WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES:' 

Quanto qnis altius in antiquitate Christiana eminuit, tanto magis 
spern finiendorum olim cruciatuum aluit atque defendit. — Dader. 
Inst. Theol. ii, 199. 

In this chapter I propose to shew : 1. That 
universalism prevailed very widely in the primitive 
church, especially in the earliest centuries. 2. 
That those who believed and taught it, more or 
less openly, or held kindred views, were among 
the most eminent, and the most holy of the 
Christian Fathers. 3. That the larger hope, not 
alone has never been condemned by the Church, 
but is, far more than any other, in harmony with 
the ancient Catholic Creeds. 4. That in our 
Prayer Book are not a few passages, which shew 
a distinct leaning towards universalism. Strong 
and clear as is the evidence which I hope to ad- 
duce, doubtless it would have been stronger still, 
had not the dangerous doctrine of Reserve been held 
by so many Fathers — a doctrine which justified 
the suppression of a truth which it was judged 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



inexpedient to divulge — and which was specially 
brought to bear on this particular question* of 
uni versalism. I mar mention as avowed univer- 
salists among the Fathers, or holding kindred 
views : S. Clement of Alexandria ; Origen ; 
S. Gregory (Thaumaturgus) ; Hilary the Dea- 
con ; Titus of Bostra ; S. Gregory of Nazianzus ; 
S. Gregory of Nyssa ; S. Jerome ; Theodoret ; 
Diodorus of Tarsus ; Didymus ; etc., etc. 

The earliest of all Christian writers, Clement 
Romanus, may claim a brief notice before we 
pass on. It is noteworthy that in his epistle, 
which is of considerable length, there is not a 
word tending to shew that he believed in endless 
punishment ; while there are two or three 
passages that seem to suggest at least hope for 
all. Thus he says "God is free from wrath 
"toward all His creatures." " God does good 
" to all, most abundantly to us Christians." l< We 
" are justified * * by that faith, through 
" which God has justified all men." 

As a proof of the early appearance of universalist 
views in the Church, the following is of interest : 
" Within a hundred years " says Dr. Cox, " of 
" the death of St. John, there appeared a work 



* So true is this that there is reason to suppose that the larger 
hope was secretly held by some who, in their public teaching 
maintained explicitly the ordinary creed. 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 79 



" of fiction, called the Gospel of Mcodemus, 
"which proposed to set forth all the details of 
" Christ's descent into Hades ; of course, to us, 
" this fiction speaks with an authority no greater 
" than that of the Pilgrim's Progress ; although, 
" when it appeared, it was very widely received 
" as an authoritative description of our Lord's 
" ministry in Hades. But just as from Bunyan's 
" great allegory, we might very safely infer what 
" the Puritan conception of the Christian life was 
" in the seventeenth century ; so from this Grospel 
" of Xicodemus, we may very safely infer, what 
" conception the Christians of the second century 
"formed of Christ's descent into Hades; 
" and in this Gospel it is expressly affirmed that 
"when He arrived, the gates of the Hadean 
" prison burst open before Him, and the King of 
" Glory, taking our forefather, Adam, by the 
"hand, and turning to the vast multitude of 
" imprisoned spirits, said, 1 come all with me, as 
" many as have died through the tree which he, 
" (AdamJ touched, for behold I raise you all up 
" through the tree of the Cross.' " It is impossible 
to resist the conclusion that so to teach involves 
universalism. All, without exception, who had 
died in Adam, are to be raised up to new life 
through the Cross. 

"It argues," says S. Gregory the Great, 
" absolute fatuity , to suppose that those who lived 



80 WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



" after the Incarnation can be worse off than if 
"they had lived before it." — Lib. vii. ep. xv. 
Here, then, is a most significant fact, pointing to 
the wide currency of universalist views in the 
early church ; for it is clear that many of the 
Fathers taught that Christ freed every soul, 
without exception, from the prison of Hades. 

As the point is interesting, I add here some further quo- 
tations. I shall begin with another brief extract from the 
antient Gospel of Nicodemus. Hades, personified, speaks 
of the result of Christ's preaching in these words : " Not 
"one of the dead has been left in me." A statement, 
perhaps even earlier, of the same fact is given by Eusebius, 
as found by him at Edessa, in the archives, to the effect that 
Christ had descended into Hades * * and brought up 
the dead with Him. To the same effect, apparently of all 
the dead ; he, himself, writes " that Christ opened a way 
" of return to life for the dead bound in chains of death." — 
Dem. evan. iv. 12. Iren^eus seems to teach the same : 
"The Word made spoil of Satan's goods, namely, those men 
"whom he held in bondage." — Coat. Hcer., v. 21. So S. 
Cyprian : " Christ descending into Hades, brought back 
"that which had been of old made captive." — Be unct. 
Chris. Again Athanasius (?) 373 a.d., writes : " The Devil 
" sitting by the gates sees all the fettered beings led forth 
"by the courage of the Saviour."—//?. Pass. Bom. So, 
too, S. Gregory of Nazianzus, says : " Christ loosed, by 
" His blood, all who groan under Tartarean chains and 
elsewhere speaks of the object of the descent as being that 
" Christ might deliver all, being free Himself." — In Chris, 
pat To the same effect writes S. Ambrose (?) 357 a.d., 
Christ in His " descent gave to all pardon, bearing them 
"aloft into Heaven."— A?. Rom. And again "Christ 
" having destroyed the empire of death, recalled to life, out 
" of the jaws of Satan, souls bound in sin." — Be myst 
Paschm. c. iv. S. Chrysostom has many passages to the 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 81 



same effect : " By Christ's dying Tartarus lost those whom 
"it contained." — Serm. v. Again, he represents Christ as 
saying : " Lo, I exterminate the aboples of Tartarus, and 
" darkness profound." — Serm. iii. Elsewhere the same 
Father says: " Christ bound the devil and brought his prey, 
" the human race, into the treasury of the Eternal King." — 
In Ps. 46. A similar passage is found in a homily of this 
Father's on Ps. 145. S. Ambrose writes : Christ "descending 
" into Hades set free the human race." — In. ep. ad Gal. ch. 
iii. So S. Jerome : " The Lord set all free, when His 
" Spirit went down into Hades." — In Ose. ch. xiii. And 
so in another passage : " The region of the dead, 
" which is torn asunder and emptied, when by the death of 
"Christ the souls bound in Hell are set free." — In Job, ch. 
36. So S. Cyril of Alexandria, 444 A.D., writes of Christ as 
" having spoiled Hades, and left the Devil there solitary and 
"deserted" (significant words). — Horn. vii. And again, 
" Christ wandering down even to Hades has emptied the 
"dark, hidden, unseen treasuries." — Glaphy. ii. And in 
another place he says that " Hades was stript of its spirits." 
Horn, vi., so, too, Horn. xi. Dorotheus has the following, 
" By Adam's transgression the enemy made us all captives, 
u * * Christ then took us again out of the enemy's 
" hand." — De sanct. Pasch. I shall close this list with a 
quotation from Leo (Tmperator). " Christ is risen, bringing 
"Hades with Him." He adds, that thus " Hades, death, 
" and the hateful Devil are utterly overthrown." — Horn. ii. 
These passages indicate a very wide-spread belief in the 
deliverance, by Christ, of the whole human race from 
Hades. 

But there is another way in which w^e may 
find the larger hope virtually, though indirectly, 
taught by some of the Fathers. 

I may state the case thus : There is reason to think that 
several Fathers, e.g., Lactantius, Hilary, Basil, and 
Ambrose, believed at least in the final salvation of all the 



82 WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



baptised, no matter what their life had been. But this 
teaching involves universalism, because our Lord plainly 
implies that those who disobey wilfully, as do unfaithful 
Christians, will have a worse future doom than the Heathen, 
who have never heard of Him. Nor is this all. The lan- 
guage of several of the Fathers in the Manich»an contro- 
versy certainly involves universalism. I refer to the 
arguments used in controverting the views of those, who 
taught the eternity of two opposing principles of good and 
evil. The Catholic teachers fc< prove their point, either by 
" asserting, that all evil shall one day cease, or else that evil 
u is nothing. Thus in the dabate between Manes and 
"Archelaus, a.d. 227, the truth is sustained against the 
" Manichaean view, by the declaration that all evil may and 
" will cease," a point surely most significant ; for what is 
the larger hope but this — the cessation of all evil 1 Again, 
many of the Fathers, e.g., S. Athanasius, Basil, Gregory 
of Nyssa, and others, often use language implying, that 
evil has no real being, or is, in fact, a tendency to non- 
existence. The latter view is distinctly taught by S. 
Augustine. — De. mor. Man. ii. 2, 3. " But if this be so, 
" asks Mr. Jukes, what becomes of the doctrine of never 
" ending punishment, which is surely never ending existence 
" in evil 1 The popular creed is thus shown to be practically 
undistinguishable from the Manichaean heresy, in so* far as 
both agree in the essential fact of teaching the eternal dura- 
tion of evil. 

I will now take the more direct testimony in 
favour of universalism, which abounds in the 
writings of the Fathers. The first witness I 
propose to call is the famous S. Clement of 
Alexandria, 190 a.d., head of the catechetical 
school there. 

His language is quite clear. " So Christ saves all men. 
" Some He converts by penalties, others who follow Him of 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 83 



" their own will, and in pursuance of the worthiness of His 
" honour ; that every knee may be bent to Him, of those in 
" Heaven, on earth, and under the earth, i.e., angels, men, 
" and souls, who, before His coming, passed away from this 
"mortal life." — In 1 ep. S. Joann. And again, all "things 
" have been appointed by the Lord for the salvation of all, 
" both in general and in particular. * * Necessary dis- 
" cipline by the goodness of the great overseeing Judge, 
" through the proximate angels, through the final judgement, 
" compels even those who have entirely despaired to repent " 
Strom, vii. 7. Comment on these words is needless. S. 
Clement here asserts with perfect distinctness, that 
willingly, or taught by penalty, all souls shall repent and be 
saved. So, again, he asks, " How is He a Saviour except 
" He is Lord and Saviour of all ? He is certainly the 
" Saviour of those who have believed, and of those who 
" have believed not He is Lord, until by being brought to 
" confess Him, they shall receive the blessings, suited and 
" adapted to them. He is Saviour, not of some and of 
" others not. His will must take effect. Nor can He who 
" is Lord of all, ever be hindered by another. He will 
" never neglect His own work Being then the Father's f 
"power, He easily prevails in what He wishes ; so that His 
" design to save cannot fail. He * * by the 
" will of the Father directs the salvation of all. 
"God is the One Almighty Good God, from eternity to 
"eternity (a seculo in secidum), saving by His Son. All 
" things are arranged with a view to the salvation of the 
" universe by the Lord of the universe." — Strom. Lib. vii. 
Again the same Father says of Christ, "That He 
" pervades equally all humanity * * having bestowed 
" on man the inalienable inheritance of the Father * * 
" inscribing on our minds the law * * that all shall 
" know God, from small to great." — Cohort, ad. gent. cxi. 
In the same spirit he comments on the words: "If to- 
" day we hear His voice ?" by "saying that with " God it is 
"always to-day ; to-day is eternity, extends over eternity," 
implying that those unsaved in time will then be saved " for 



84 WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



"this," Clement adds in the same chapter, "and nothing 
" but this is Christ's only work, the salvation of man." — 
lb. ix. Lastly, in an interesting passage, S. Clement speaks 
of Christ as having "yoked the team of humanity to God," 
and as thus " driving into Heaven * * crowned with 
"victory." Of S. Clement, I would say, that like Gregory 
of Nyssa, universalism is not incidentally taught by him, 
but lies at the very centre of his teaching. God, in his 
view, is ruling the universe with a fixed resolve to save all. 
If men are disobedient to the message of salvation, then by 
discipline and by punishments, He sooner or later brings 
all to repentance. 

Before passing on, I may point out that S. 
Clement, like many of the Fathers, regarded 
death as a provision designed in mercy for the 
healing of the lapsed race of man — see on death, 
ch. ix. To this effect writes an early Father, in 
the second century, in words clear and signi- 
ficant : — 

" And God shewed great kindness to man, in this, that 
" He did not suffer him to continue being in sin for ever ; 
" but as it were by a kind of banishment, cast him out of 
" paradise, in order that, having by punishment expiated 
" within an appointed time the sin, and having been disci- 
" plined, he should be afterivards recalled. * * Further, 
" just as a vessel, when on being fashioned, it has some flaw, 
" is being re-moulded, or re-made, that it may become new 
" and entire ; so also it happens to man by death. For he is 
" broken up by force, that in the resurrection he may be 
" luhole, I mean righteous, spotless and immortal." — Theo- 
philus of Antioch, ad Autolycum, ii. 26. Here death is 
viewed as provided in mercy for a fallen creature, and as a 
means for the restoration of the human race to paradise : a 
view most suggestive to the thoughtful. It is interesting 
to note the very same illustration in S. Gregory of Nyssa. 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 85 



He supposes a vessel of clay, which by craft, has been filled 
with molten lead ; the vessel representing man, the lead our 
sins, and God the potter. He describes the potter as break- 
ing up the vessel to re-mould it, and banish the intruding 
matter : " So He, who is our Potter, dissolving away (by 
" death) the tainted part, will bring back the vessel, re- 
" moulded through the resurrection, into its former beauty.'' 
— Cat. orat. viii. — See note on S. Ambrose, in this chapter. 
In the same general tone is the treatise of Athenagoras, 
A.d. 177, on the Eesurrection. I give a few sentences. 
" .And as this follows, of necessity there must be a resurrec- 
" tion of the bodies which are dead or even wholly dissolved, 
" and the same men must be formed anew * * for if 
" this takes place, there follows too, the end which befits 
"the nature of man. But the end of an intelligent life, and 
" a reasonable judgement, one cannot go wrong in saying, is 
" * * to rejoice unceasingly in the vision of Him who is, 
" and of His decrees." — Be. resurr. c. xxv, As illustrating 
further this idea, let me again quote S. Clement.* In his 
view the penalty of the law is beautiful and good, its object 
is healing even in inflicting death. " If a man goes on in 
"wickedness, it condemns such an one to death, as the 
" course most conducive to health. So that when any one 
" falls into incurable evil # * it will be for his good if he 
" is put to death." So, "the terror which the law begets 
"is in order to salvation."— Strom, i. xxvii. Even of Sodom 
Clement writes : " The just punishment of the Sodomites 
" became to men an image of the salvation which is well 
"calculated for men." — Peed. iii. 8. And, writing on Jucle 
vii, -of the doom of Sodom and Gomorrah, he says : "By 
" which the Lord signifies that pardon had been granted, 
"and that on being disciplined they had repented," and on 
verse v., says of the Jews, "they perished until they 
"turned to the Lord." ..Frag. ii. (in An Nic. Lib.), i.e. 
by dying they lived. These extracts shew that in his view 
all penalty, death included, is a mode of healing and cure. 



Further proof of the prevalence of universalist 



86 WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



views at a very early date in the Church, may be 
drawn from the so-called Sibylline books, which 
were composed (except a certain portion, which 
is pre-christian), at various dates in the second 
and third centuries. These books furnish us 
with most valuable evidence as to the beliefs 
current in the Church, in these early days. 

They teach distinctly the future torments of the lost, but 
add that finally, at the request of the blessed, they shall be 
admitted to a share of the joys of Heaven. " To them God 
" shall grant to save mankind, for gathering each from 
" unwearied flame, removing them elsewhere, He shall send 
" them to a life different and eternal for immortals." — Orac. 
ii. 331. The true force of this is only seen when we 
remember that the object of the authors of these books was 
to draw, by any means, the heathen over to Christianity. 
Now ft would have helped this end if they could have 
depicted a future of hopeless torment as awaiting unbe- 
lievers. This doctrine then it was their direct interest to 
teach. But instead of doing this they taught the final 
restoration of all ; giving this proof, practically irresistible, 
that the larger hope was, to them, so essential a part of 
Christianity that they dared not teach otherwise. 

I give next a few quotations from the famous 
Origen, born at Alexandria a.d. 186, and when 
only 18 called to preside over its school of 
theology. 

Writing on 1 Cor. xv. 28, he says, "When the Son is said 
" to be subject to the Father, the perfect restoration of the 
" whole creation is signified." — De prin. iii. 5. And again, 
speaking of the end, " God will be all * * " seeing evil 
" nowhere exists, for God is all things." "When death 
" shall no longer exist, or the sting of death, nor any evil at 
" all, then, verily God will be all in all " — lb. iii. vi. 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 87 



Elsewhere this Father states the same doctrine. " But 
" those who have been removed from their primal state of 
"blessedness have not been removed irrecoverably * * 
" and being remoulded by salutary discipline and principles, 
" they may recover themselves, and be restored to their 
"condition of happiness." — Be prin. i. vi. — Of Origen's 
system of doctrine, I shall speak in another part of this 
chapter. Here it is enough to say, first, that universalism 
was taught before him by S. Clement ; secondly, that it was 
wholly independant of his system ; and thirdly, it was held 
by some of those who opposed his vieivs quite as firmly as by 
himself. 

Another antient universalist is the well-known 
S. Gregory (Thaumaturgus). Born of heathen 
parents, he was converted, a.d. 234, by Origen, 
whose friend and pupil he became. 

As Bishop of Neo Csesareia, he was distinguished for 
orthodoxy and numerous miracles. He there converted 
nearly the whole population to Christianity. Bound as he 
was to Origen by the closest possible ties, he would naturally, 
in turn, teach the larger hope ; and thus, from so impor- 
tant a centre as Csesareia, a vast district, would in turn, be 
leavened. That S. Gregory did, in fact, so teach is no 
mere conjecture, as we know from Eufinus, Invec. in Hier. 
Lib. i. prope fin., who speaks of his opinions as notorious. 

Our next witness shall be Fabius Marius 
Victorinus, 360 a.d., a very distinguished 
rhetorician at Rome (where he was converted 
to Christianity), who uses language which 
implies the ultimate purification and salvation 
of all. 

Christ will, he says, " regenerate all things, as he created 
" all things. By the life that is in Him, cdl things will be 



88 WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



" purged and return into eternal life. Christ is to subject 
" all things to Himself * * when this shall have been 
" accomplished, God will be all things, because all things 
"will be full of God." — Adv. Arium lib. i., et iii. At 
about the same date there flourished a famous catholic 
champion against Arianism, Marcellus, Bishop of Ancyra, 
330 a.d. In his History of Ant. Universctlism (a book to 
which I desire to express myself deeply indebted), Ballou 
states that Marcellus was a universalist, giving as authority 
a quotation from Euseb. Oont. Marc, i, in Neander's Ch. 
his. ii. 609 which I have not been able to verify. 

About this same period there flourished a 
writer (supposed to be Hilary, a deacon of the 
Roman Church), whose works are extant under 
the name of Ambrosiaster. 

They supply fresh proof how outspoken was the 
universalism of the early church. " This seemed good to 
" God to manifest in Christ the mystery of His will * * 
"namely, that He should be merciful to all who had 
" strayed, whether in Heaven or in earth (i.e., fallen angels 
"or men) * * Every * being then * * is being restored to 
" the place in ivhich it was created, by learning the knoivledge 
" of Christ." — In Eph. iii. 9-10. These striking words 
show how freely, in primitive days, not merely the final 
salvation of all men, but of all evil spirits was taught. 

The next witness I shall call is a famous 
Catholic Father, Titus, Bishop of Bostra, 364 
a.d., who taught explicitly an extreme form of 
universalism. He is described in the preface to 



* These words seem decisive ; but Baxlou asserts (without, how- 
ever, giving any proof) that Ambrosiaster believed some obsti- 
nate cases to be past recovery. 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 89 



his writings by Caillou, as " the most learned 
" among the learned bishops of his age." 

Three books out of four which he wrote against the 
Manichgeans are extant, I transcribe a striking passage, in 
which he is speaking of evil spirits. " The very pit itself 
"is a place of torments and of punishments, but is not 
" eternal * * It was made that it might be a medicine 
" and yield help to those who sin. Sacred are the stripes 
" ivhich are remedies and helps to those who have strayed." 
He adds that the object of penalty is healing. " Therefore 
" let us not complain of the pits (of Hell) — abyssis — but 
" rather know that by torments and punishments those are 
" healed who have offended." He goes on to say " That the 
" evil spirits (dsemones) themselves are not radically evil, nor 
" have they the root of sin and vice (in themselves), 
" but have sinned of free will, seeing that they were not 
" naturally evil." — Lib. i., ch. xxxii. Such words from a 
Bishop and Father, so eminent, of so early a date, and so 
orthodox, are very significant. Titus teaches the salvation 
of all evil spirits, a form of universalism which goes to the 
very extremest point possible. Compare remarks on page 
82, on the Manichaean controversy. 

Another very great name there is, whose 
testimony must be given here, S. Gregory, of 
Nazianzus, 373 a.d., president of the second great 
Ecumenical Council, " the most learned bishop 
"in one of the most learned ages of the church." 
His language certainly shows a distinct leaning 
to universalis t views. 

Let us take a few examples of the way in which he hints 
to say the least, his belief in the final salvation of all men. 
Speaking of the dead, he tells us that God brings them to 
life as partakers either of fire or of illuminating light. 
*° But whether even all shall hereafter partake of G-OD,let it be 



90 WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



''elsewhere discussed " — these words speak for themselves, 
In the same tone, cautious, and no doubt influenced by that 
doctrine of Eeserve already mentioned, S. Gregory says 
elsewhere — " I know also afire not cleansing but penal * * 
" which, more to be dreaded than all, is conjoined with the 
" undying worm, which is not quenched * * unless anyone 
" pleases, even in this instance, to understand this more 
" humanely and worthily of Him who punishes." — Or at. 
xi. " It is manifest,'" says Petavius, " that in this place, 
" Gregory doubted about the pains of the damned, 
il whether they would be endless, or whether they are to be 
" estimated rather in accordance with the mercy of God, 
"so as at some time to be brought to an end." Rut there 
remains further evidence of S. Gregory's views. He 
teaches, with perfect distinctness, that when Christ 
descended into Hell, He liberated not some, but all the souls 
there in prison (See pp. 79-81). This view, as already 
shewn, implies universalism. 

Our next witness deserves special attention — 
the fimous Gregory, of Xyssa, 380 a.d., at once 
the very flower of orthodoxy, and the most un- 
flinching advocate of extreme universalism. 

I proceed to quote in proof of this. S. Gregory, in 
a remarkable passage, speaks of Christ as " both freeing 
" mankind from their wickedness, and healing the very in- 
" ventor of 'wickedness (the Devil)." — Cat. orat. ch. 26. 
Again he tells us that " when, in the lengthened circuits 
" of time, the evil now blended with and implanted in them, 
" has been taken away ; when the restoration to their 
" ancient state of those who now lie in wickedness shall 
" have taken place, there shall be with one voice thanks- 
" giving from the whole creation" — Tb. In another treatise 
the same great Father writes, "for it is needful that at some 
"time, evil shall be removed utterly and entirely from the 
"realm of existence. For since by its very nature evil 
"cannot exist apart from free choice, when free choice 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 91 



"becomes in the power of God, shall not evil advance 
"to utter abolition, so that no receptacle for it shall 
" be left ?" — Be an. et, ressurrect. Here it is quite 
clear that the saint anticipates the utter extinction 
of evil at some future day. Again, writing on Phil. ii. 10, 
S. Gregory says that " in this passage is signified, that 
" when evil has been obliterated in the long circuits of the 
" ages, nothing shall be left outside the limits of good ; but 
"even from them shall be unanimously uttered the confes- 
" sion of the Lordship of Christ." — lb. " The word seems 
"to lay down the doctrine of the perfect obliteration of 
" ivickedness, for if God shall be in all things that aro, 
" obviously wickedness shall not be in them." — lb. Again, 
" he teaches " that a time shall come when all the corruptions 
" that sin has brought in shall be blotted from the whole 
"creation." — lb. In another treatise of the same Father, 
the Or at. in 1 Cor. xv. 28, there is the widest possible asser- 
tion of universalism, viz., " at some time the nature of evil 
" shall pass to extinction, being fully and completely removed 
"fromthe realm of existence; and divine unmixed goodness shall 
" embrace in itself every rational nature : nothing that has 
" been made by God falling away from the Kingdom of 
" God : when, all the evil that is blended with existence, 
" being melted away by the action of the cleansing fire, 
"everything that has had its being from God shall become 
" such as it was at first, when as yet untainted by evil." In 
this strain, S. Gregory continues all through this treatise. 
Every form of evil is to be swept away ; every rational 
creature shall bow the knee in love and peace to Jesus 
Christ. " For it is evident that God will, in truth, be ' in 
"all* then when there shall be no evil seen in anything." 
And again " when every created being is at harmony with 
" itself * * and every tongue shall confess that Jesus 
" Christ is Lord ; when every creature shall have been 
" made one body, then shall the body of Christ be subject 
'•to the Father." * * Now the body of Christ, 
" as I have often said, is the whole of humanity." Again in 
the clearest manner, S. Gregory maintains, that subjection 



92 WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



to God is reconciliation to God. " Where it is said 
" that God's enemies shall be subjected fco God * * this is 
" meant that the power of evil shall be taken away, and 
" they who, on account of their disobedience, were called 
" God's enemies, shall by subjection, be made God's friends. 
" * * When then all who once were God's enemies, shall 
" have been made His footstool (because they shall receive in 
" themselves the divine imprint), when death shall have been 
" destroyed ; in the subjection of all, which is not servile 
" humility, but immortality and blesiedness, Christ is said, 
"by S. Paul, to be made subject to God." The breadth of 
view inthese extracts is almost startling, and if space permitted, 
they might very easily be increased. Universalism in its 
extremest form, not in isolated sentences, but as the centre 
of his teaching, characterizes this great Father. And this 
universalism is as fearless as it is clear ; it is written in 
defence of the Catholic Faith. With the Dean of Wells, 
I say, " That S. Gregory claims to be taking his stand on 
"the doctrines of the Church in this teaching, with as 
"much confidence as when he is expounding the mysteries 
" of the Divine nature, as set forth in the Creed of Niesea." 
And later Councils, e.g., Ephesus and Constantinople, 
appealed to this universalist Father as a bulwark of the Church 
against heresy. 

Our next witness shall be the celebrated 
Didymus, 380 a.d., a prodigy of learning, who, 
in spite of his blindness, rose to be head of the 
theological school of Alexandria. 

There seems no doubt that he taught the larger hope 
in the extremest form. Rufinus, who calls him his master, 
alludes to it as an undoubted fact. — Invert in Hier. lib. i. See 
also Cyrill. Scyth. Vit. 8. P. S 'bee. In this view of 
Didymus, both Neander and Gieseler agree. Not many 
of his writings survive. The following short extract is 
worth quoting, "As mankind by being reclaimed from their 
"sins are to be subjected to Christ in the dispensation 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 93 



" appointed for the salvation of all, so the (fallen) angels will 
"be reduced to obedience by the correction of their vices." 
— Comm. in 1 Peter in. 

Let us in passing, not omit the testimony 
of S. Ambrose, 390 a.d. 

"Not only are there passages in his book. — De bono 
mortis " says Mr. Jukes, " which can never, as it appears 
"to rne be reconciled with the doctrine of never-ending 
" punishment, but the whole drift of the book is in an 
" entirely opposite direction. Thus the whole fourth 
" chapter is to prove that death is altogether good, because 
" it is the end of sin, as also because it redeemed the world. 
u * # j n a wor( i j according to S. Ambrose, sin is the great 
" evil, while, what we call death is God's means to deliver 
"man from the evil. But all this is directly opposed to the 
" popular notion of future punishment, which regards the 
" second death as hopeless torment." I take the following 
from chapter iv. of this book : " In every way then death 
" is good * * because it does not change one's state for the 
" worse. We shall find death to be the end of sin. The 
"Lord suffered death that guilt might cease. What is 
"death but the burial of vices, the stirring up of virtues ? 
" What more can be said of the good of death, than that 
" death redeemed the world ? Why blame death, which 
"either pays the price of life or ends its pain and torment 1 
" If life be a burden, death is a release ; if life be a punish- 
"ment, death is a remedy." The following, too, is worth 
" quoting : " Christo dedit Pater omne judicium. Poterit 
" ergo te ille damnare pro quo se obtulit ? * * Nonne dicet, 
" quae utilitas in sanguine meo si damno quern ipse salvavi?" 
— De Jacob, et vit beat. It would be hard to state more 
concisely the larger hope. And so of Dives the same 
Father writes, " that he was tormented by retributive 
"suffering, in order that he might the sooner escape" — In 
Ps. cxviii. 1. 



94 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



Nor should the great name of Diodorus, of 
Tarsus, be absent from the roll of early uni- 
versalists. 

In his life time he was noted for zeal in defence of the 
Nicene Creed, and died in universal honour ; having, says 
Theodoret, saved the bark of the Church from being sub- 
merged under the waves of unbelief. Of his numerous 
writings but little has survived. The following is 
from his book Be cecon. : " For the wicked there are punish- 
"ments, not perpetual * * but they are to be tormented 
"for a certain brief period * * according to the amount of 
" malice in their works. They shall therefore suffer punish- 
" ment for a short space, but immortal blessedness, having no 
" end awaits them. * * The resurrection, therefore, is 
" regarded as a blessing not only to the good but also to the 
"evil."— (Seep. 145). 

A contemporary of Diodorus was the eminent 
Theodore* of Mopsuestia, and like him a uni- 
versalist. Theodore enjoyed during his life time 
an extraordinary renown as a teacher of the 
Catholic faith. " He was," says Dorner, " the 
" crown and climax of the school of Antioch, and 
" was called the Master of the East from his 
" theological eminence." 

Theodre teaches " that in the world to come, those who 
" have done evil all their life long, will be made worthy of 

* Theodore and Diodorus, after they had rested for a century 
and a quarter in their honoured graves, were it is true, condemned as 
Nestorians in the Fifth Council, an assembly unrecognised by the 
English Church. No question of universalism ivas thereby raised, 
for the very promoters of this council were Origenists and intrigued 
against Theodore on the very ground of his hostility to Origen. 
" Every accession to our knowledge of Theodoke adds strength to 
' 1 the conviction, that he was entirely unconscious of deviating from 
"the Catholic Church " — Swete, Comm. 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 95 



" the sweetness of the Divine bounty. For never would 
" Christ have said, ' Until thou hast paid the uttermost 
" farthing-, ' unless it were possible for us to be cleansed 
"when we have paid the debt." Again, S. Paul, he argues, 
speaks of the Resurrection as a boon. " But how can it be 
" a blessing if a penalty, without any design of amendment, 
" be allotted to them that rise ? Who is so great a fool as to 
" think that so great a blessing can be to those that arise 
"the occasion of endless torment f- Frag. iv. (Migne. S. 
Jer.J. " Death and corruption shall come to an end, all 
" things being brought back to one harmony, as S. Paul 
" wrote to the Rom. viii. W-23."—Swete. i. 268. 

I take next Theodoret, the Blessed. This 
great Father was, I cannot doubt, a universalist. 
Born at Antioch, 393, he became Bishop of 
Cyrus, in Syria, in 427,A.D. 

Writing on 1 Cor. xv. 25, he says, " That in the future life 
" when corruption is at an end, and immortality granted, 
"there is no place for suffering, but it (suffering) being totally 
" removed, no form of sin remains at work. So shall God 
" be all in all, all things being out of danger of falling, and 
" converted to Him." In Theodoret's view the resurrection 
was not merely a bodily but a spiritual force (essentially) 
bringing to man's whole nature immortality and immunity 
from sufferings (a view held substantially by S. Gregory of 
Nyssa (p. 145), see his comments on Rom v. 15-8 and 
viii. 20-3. In this spirit Theodoret writes in the tenth 
oration on Providence " Christ is to free from death the 
" entire nature of the human race," on the words, " I, if I 
" be lifted up will draw all men unto Me." " Christ," he 
says, " will not suffer merely for the sake of the body, but 
" will fully accomplish the resurrection to all men," i.e., the 
spiritual blessings it conveys. 

This view of the Resurrection, as in itself a 
blessing to all, as implying restoration spiritually 



96 WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



deserves to be noted. S. Gregory, of Nyssa, 
teaches it very distinctly, as do other Fathers. 

In this view the Resurrection meant to all a higher 
life — a restoration — an undoing of all the work of the Fall. 
It meant immortality and incorruption — things, says S. 
Gregory, peculiar to the Divine nature, and in themselves 
a blessing. There is a long and striking passage to this 
effect in the De an. et resur. " The apostle's words seem to 
" me to imply * what our definition contains, i.e., that the 
" Resurrection is nothing else than the restoration of our nature 
" to its ancient state of blessedness. This corruptible must put 
" on incorruption. Evidently, incorruption and honour and 
" glory are peculiar to the Divine nature * * Every 
" human being singly, divested of mortality and blended 
"with the earth, is to be born again in the Resurrection 
" into His pristine beauty. * * Doubtless, the evil 
" are to look for great severity from the Judge ; but after 
" due curative treatment, and when the fire shall have 
" destroyed all foreign matter, then the nature, even of 
" these, shall improve by the copious nurture they receive, 
" and at length they, too, shall regain the Divine impress." 
I might very easily quote more, but the sentences cited are 
enough for the thoughtful. They are, indeed, only what S. 
Paul teaches, I Cor. xv., and explain his tone of triumph in 
view of the Resurrection, and his hope that there would be 
a resurrection of the unjust as well as of the just. — See on 
Acts xxiv. 15, p. 145. Lastly, let me point out what fresh 
hope and light thus fall on the familiar words, so aptly 
conjoined, "I believe in the Resurrection of the Body, and the 
" Life everlasting!' 

Next we shall consider the testimony of S. 
Jerome, the most learned of all the Latin 
Fathers. 

Born near Aquileia, 346 A.D., he became a student in 
Rome, passing his latest years in monastic seclusion and 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 97 



literary labour at Bethlehem. It will surprise some readers 
to learn how strongly S. Jerome wrote in his commen- 
taries in favour of universalism in its extremest form. I 
will take some specimens. "Christ will, in the ages to 
" come, show, not to one, but to the whole number of rational 
"creatures, His glory, and the riches of His grace, by 
" means of us (Christians)." * * " The saints are to reign 
"over the fallen angels, and the prince of this world, Lucifer, 
* even to them bringing blessing * * — In Eph. ii. 7. 
Most explicit and outspoken is the following : — " In the 
" end of all things the whole body which has been dissipated 
" and torn into divers parts shall be restored." * * 
" Let us understand the ivhole number of rational creatures 
" under the figure of a single body " * * let us imagine 
" this body to be torn * in pieces, and then suppose some 
u wonderful physician to come and restore to its place every 
"part * * So in the restitution of all things, when 
" the true physician, Jesus Christ, shall have come to 
"heal the body of the Church, every one * shall 
"receive his proper place * * What I mean is, 
"the fallen angel ivill begin to be thai which he was 
" created, and man, who has been expelled from Paradise, 
" will be once more restored to the tilling of Paradise. These 
" things then will take place universally." — In Eph. iv. 16. 
^gain, S. Jerome says expressly, " With God no rational 
"creature perishes eternally. 1 '' — In Gal. v. 20. "For God 
" pities his creature, and will not suffer those whom He 
" himself has formed to perish eternally. * * Seeing 
" then that the spirit comes from God * * it is not just 
" that they should perish eternally, who are sustained by 
"His breath and spirit." — In Is. lvii. 6. Note the wide 
sweep and range of the principle here asserted. In another 
place he writes, " Death shall come as a visitor to the 
" impious ; it will not be perpetual ; it will not annihilate 
" them ; but will prolong its visit, till the impiety ivhich is 
" in them shall be consumed." — In Mic. v. 8. Again 
speaking of the consummation of all things, S. Jerome 
says, on Zeph. iii. 10, "The prophet, here aware of the 
" extent of God's menyy, is like the Psalmist communing 



98 WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



" with his heart and asking, ' will the Lord cast off for 
" ever V of which the meaning is — I did think God would 
" abandon sinners for ever, but now I perceive that it was 
" all done for this end * * to change everything, and 
" that he might shew mercy on those whom he h r td before 
cast away." Other passages of similar tone will be found 
quoted from S. Jerome, on pp. 154-5, 156-7, and in ch. 
ix., sect, on Death and Judgment. No language can be 
more explicit than the foregoing ; nor are these isolated 
instances : I have found nearly 40 passages in his various 
commentaries (and there are doubtless others) indicating S. 
Jerome's sympathy with universalism, and how largely it 
enters into his system of teaching. Doubtless, like some 
Fathers already cited, he is not always consistent. Doubt- 
less, too, he sought to retract, in part at least, what he had 
written. But liter a scripta ma.net ; and we must remember 
that no hypothesis, other than belief on the writer's part, can 
account for passages teaching universalism in any Father ; 
while passages, seemingly or really inconsistent with it, 
admit of a ready explanation by the doctrine of Reserve or 
Economy, which, as I have said, specially applied to this 
question. 

To these testimonies may be added that of 
Facundus, a man of considerable eminence, 
Bishop of Hermiane, and chosen to represent the 
African Bishops at the council of Chalcedon, 
451, A.D. 

The following passage is interesting as showing that at 
this early date he and others regarded those who held the 
doctrine of the final salvation of all men, as most holy and 
glorious teachers ; and also as proving how widely such 
views prevailed in the early Church. Facundus says — 
" To all this is to be added the confession of Domitian of 
k< Galatia, formerly Bishop of Ancyra ; for in the book 
" which he wrote to Vigilius * * he says, they have 
" hastily run out to anathematize most holy and glorious 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 99 



" teachers, on account of those doctrines which have been 
" advanced concerning pre-existence and restitution, and 
"this, indeed, under pretext of Origen, but thereby 
" anathematizing all those Saints, who were before and have 
" been after him." — Pro. def. trium cap. iv. 4. 

To the evidence already given, may be added 
the language of several of the ancient Liturgies, 
in which prayer is offered, not alone for the faith- 
ful departed, but for all the dead, and for the 
salvation of the human race. 

Thus in the liturgy, bearing the name of S. Basil, are 
these words, " 0 Lord our God remember all Thy people, 
" and pour out on all men Thy rich mercy, granting to all 
" their petitions unto salvation ; * * Be Thou Thy- 
" self all things to all men." In the liturgy of S. 
Maruthas are these words, "Remember, 0 Lord, by Thy 
" grace all those who, by means of the sentence pronounced 
" against our first Father, Adam, have departed out of this 
" miserable life, and are gone where Thou only knowest ; 
" * * give them rest among the delights, &c." Note 
how comprehensive is this prayer, and how completely it is 
in harmony with the larger hope for all men. Again, in the 
liturgy which bears S. Chrysostoms's name, Christ is 
addressed as having "brought the tvhole world into His 
" net," " we offer to Thee this reasonable service for the 
" whole world." I give next a few brief sentences from the 
Malabar liturgy — Christ is said to " quicken the tvhole 
world." Again, God is entreated "to have mercy on all 
" creatures ; and the oblation is offered for the benefit of 
"all men." In the liturgy of S. Clement, it is said in 
very suggestive phrase that God subjected man "for a 
"while to a temporary death," and "has bound Himself 
" with an oath to restore him to life again," and that 
Christ came to deliver all men from the impending 
wrath. The Armenian liturgy prays to Christ, as having 
" borne and cancelled the sin of all, as having by His Cross 



LOFC 



100 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



"renewed all creatures " (Rom. viii. 19-23). And to this day, 
in the Mass, each Eoman Catholic priest offers pro totius 
mundi salute. The liturgy of the Holy Apostles prays thus, 
" Have mercy on all creatures, that all the inhabitants of the 
" earth may know Thee." The liturgy of S. James has 
these prayers : "Visit Thy world in mercy and compassion, 
" Remember, 0 Lord, the spirits and all flesh ; give them 
" rest, etc." Elsewhere it says, " Christ appeared for the 
" salvation of the race,'* " for all men and all women." The 
Ethiopic liturgy says : " We render thanks de omnibus, pro 
" omnibus, yt in omnibus." 

I will now ask my readers to consider another 
very important piece of evidence. Within the 
first five centuries, the two great Creeds — the 
Apostles' and the Niceno — Con s ta n tin opoli tan , 
received their present form, and the first four 
General Councils were held at Nice, Constanti- 
nople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon. Now it is a 
significant fact, that though universalist views 
were then widely prevalent, no syllable of condem- 
nation was breathed against them at any of these 
councils. Nobody ever thought of including 
amongst the articles of the faith a belief in end- 
less punishment ; and this, be it remembered, 
through the very question of the life to come, 
was distinctly raised at Constantinople, in the 
clauses then added to the creed. I say, without 
fear of contradiction, that this silence would of 
itself, be an argument of irresistible weight in 
proving that universalism was, as an opinion, 
perfectly tenable in those days. 

But this is a very small part of the evidence. If the 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



101 



silence of these councils is significant, so are the following 
facts still more significant. We have the faith of the 
Church defined in two documents, of an authority in its 
kind quite unique and fundamental — the two Creeds* the 
Apostles', and that we call the Nicene. Rightly to 
estimate the weight of the testimony they bear, let us 
remember that in the second Great Ecumenical Council, 
where the Nicene Creed received its present shape, S. 
Gregory, of Nazianzus, (whose opinions are above 
referred to) presided : while the chief agent in the task of 
adding to the Nicene Creed the new clauses then adopted ; 
and ending with the significant words, " I believe in the 
" life of the world to come," (in the life, be it remembered, 
and in nothing more) was S. Gregory of Nyssa ; whose 
words quoted above, shew him to have been an unhesitating 
advocate of universal salvation What can be more signifi- 
cant of the belief of the Church in these primitive days 1 
Look at the facts. To a known and outspoken believer in 
universal salvation is entrusted principally, by the Church 
in her Great Council, the duty of defining the faith ; and 
that definition runs thus : " I believe in the life of the world 
"to come." What out the larger hope, could such words, 
under such circumstances, have conveyed to the Council 1 
And mark the position these words occupy in the creed (as 
does the corresponding clause in the f Apostles' Creed). 
They close, and as it were, sum up the whole. The creed 
opens with a statement of belief in the Great Creator ; 
it speaks of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost : of the 
work of salvation : of the Incarnation, &c. But the great 



* Whatever we may think of theAthanasian Creed — its compara- 
tively late date — its uncertain origin — its doubtful acceptance in the 
East — when it speaks of " everlasting," that term can 
mean no more than the Scriptural aionios, which it represents ; and 
as it is clear that everlasting is not the meaning of aionios (see ch. 
ix), this ("reed is really quite consistent with the larger hope. 

f On the great significance of the clause —the Descent into 
Hell — in this creed I have already spoken. 



102 WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



procession of the Christian verities ends, in both Creeds, in 
the expressive assertion of faith in everlasting life. It is 
as though both Creeds proclaimed — that to this all Christian 
truth led, in this all Christian hope culminated ; in life, and 
not in death everlasting. 

I have pointed out that many of the Fathers 
treat Death as a mode of cure, devised in mercy 
to mankind. — pp. 84-5. With this view is closely 
connected that opinion so little noticed, but so 
very suggestive which, as we have just seen, 
regards the Resurrection as in itself and to all 

o 

men a restoration to blessedness. 

It will make our enquiry into Patristic teaching more 
complete if I add now a few extracts from one or two 
of the Fathers, in which they speak of all the Divine 
punishments, as designed to heal. '* God punishes," says 
Clement of Alexandria, " for the benefit of those who are 
"punished." — Strom., vii., 16. This doctrine Clement 
repeats in passages too numerous for quotation. So too 
Theodoret — " He shews the reason of penalty, for the 
" Lord, who loves men, chastises in order to heal, like a 
" physician, that he may arrest the course of our sin." — - 
Horn, in Ezech., ch. vi. " He who shall have despised the 
" cleansing of the word of God * * is keeping himself 
V for sad penal purification, that the flame of Gehenna may 
"purify in torment him, whom neither Apostolic doctrine, 
44 nor Gospel preaching, have purified, according to that 
which is written. ' I will purify thee with fire for purifica- 
" tion.' " — Origen, Ad Rom. So too, S. Gregory of Nyssa : 
"Wherefore that at the same time liberty of free will 
"should be left to nature, and yet the evil be purged away ; 
" the wisdom of God devised this plan to suffer man to do 
" as he would; that (having tasted the evils which he desired, 
" and having, by experience, learned for what misery he 
" had betrayed away the blessings he had), he might, of his 
" own free will, hasten back with desire to the first blessed- 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 103 



" ness ; either being purged in this life through prayer and 
" discipline, or, after his departure hence, through the 
" furnace of cleansing fire." — Or at. pro. mort " Many 
" similar passages," says Bingham, ii., 782, " are to be found 
"in the Fathers." Perhaps I may be allowed again to refer 
to ch ix., sect, on Death and Judgment, for some interest- 
ing quotations from the Fathers bearing on this subject 
generally. 

Ao;ain, some of the Fathers teach the ministry 
of Christ and his elect after death, to the 
departed. 

So Clement of Alexandria.—" The Lord preached the 
"Gospel also to them, who were in Hades. And His 
" Apostles, as they did here, so there (in Hades), too, 
" preached the Gospel to those of the heathen who were 
" ready to be converted." — Strom vi. He also uses similar 
language in Strom ii., and in both passages refers to 
Heemas as teaching the same. Justin Martyr and 
Iren^eus appears to have held this view. I need not 
point out how this teaching completely contradicts modern 
popular views of the state of the departed. Further it will 
be interesting, as shewing, at least, the total divergence of 
the Fathers' teaching from medieval and modern traditions, 
to note, that some few ancient Fathers held the doctrine of 
the annihilation of the wicked, and not of their endless 
suffering, e.g., I may name Hermas, and probably Justin 
Martyr, Arnobius, and Iren^eus. So Justin Martyr 
says, " Got) ordained, that if obedient, man should partake 
"of immortal existence, but if he transgressed, the con- 
trary should be his lot. — Frag., xi. And elsewhere he 
speaks of the soul as a thing that may cease to exist, and 
may be blotted out. — Dial, rum Try., eh. v. Arnobius seems 
to have held this view.—" For the v. i.e., certain souls, are 
"hurled down, and having been reduced to nothing, vanish 
" in the frustration of a perpetual destruction." — Cont. gen. 
ii. 14. And so, I think certainly, Iren^eus teaches : in his 
view, " Continuance for ever is imparted to those who are 



104 WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



" saved," and the wicked ' ; shall not receive length of days 
"forever and ever." — Cont. har. 9 ii. 34, and iii. 18, 19 y 
20. From Iren^eus much more might be quoted to the 
same effect. But this opinion never seems to have spread, 
and probably died out at an early date. 

I would here pause for a moment, and point 
out how varied are the proofs quoted, even in this 
brief survey of Patristic teaching — e.g., Fathers, 
Creeds, Councils, Liturgies, Controversies, &c. 
Their force is thus cumulative ; the several lines, 
while independant, yet converge, and should 
bring with them an undoubted conviction of the 
wide -spread belief in universalism in the early 
Church. I may state the case in the words of a 
famous scholar. " The belief in the inalienable 
u capability of improvement in all rational beings, 
"and the limited duration of future punishment, 
" was so general, even in the West, and among the 
" opponents of Origen, that it seemed entirely 
" independant of his system. 11 — Gieseler, Eccles. 
hist, i. 212. 

I feel persuaded that most writers have greatly under- 
estimated the prevalence of universalism in primitive days. 
Take the following out of several facts that might be 
stated in proof of this, (a.) Down to the end of the 
fourth century, the School of Alexandria was the sole con- 
siderable centre of theological teaching, (b.) What the 
influence of Alexandria would be, may be gathered from 
the fact, that of its early presidents, no less than three — 
Clement, Origen, and Did ymus —were universalists. (c.) 
But the ascendency of Origen extended far beyond the 
limits of any school : his influence was in fact for nearly 
two centuries after his death practically paramount. It 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 105 



would leaven in the person of his converts, admirers, pupils, 
and readers nearly the whole of then existing Christendom ; 
and even those who opposed his general system, did not, 
as we shall see, call in question his teaching of the larger 
hope, (d.) Further, when towards the close of the 4th 
century, the school of theology at Antioch arose, it, though 
widely differing in its principles, sympathised with 
Alexandria in its universalistic teaching, as did also that 
of CvESAREA. (e) Nor should we forget the pressure con- 
stantly exerted in the direction of universalism by the 
Church's long-continued controversy with the numerous 
dualistic sects ; a controversy which led the Catholic 
Fathers to maintain, that evil was not eternal, but would 
one day wholly cease : a view which is in fact universalism. 
(/). The careful reader will not fail to note another fact, viz., 
the extent to which universalism was carried by many 
Fathers, in their clear assertion of the salvation of all evil 
spirits. Now if this extreme form of the larger hope was 
openly avowed by teachers so Catholic as GREGORY of 
Nyssa, and many others, we may safely infer that in its 
modified form, as restricted to the human race, the adherents 
of universalism would be extremely numerous.* 



* Nothing is more easy and nothing more futile, than for Dr. 
Pusey to adduce passages from the Fathers, in which aionios and 
kindred terms are used of future punishment. What does this 
prove ? It proves clearly something very embarrassing to those 
who maintain the ordinary creed. It proves that those Great 
Masters of Theology whose native tongue was Greek like Origen 
and Gregory, <fec, did not attach to aionios and its kindred 
phrases any idea of endlessness. Doubtless, certain of the Fathers 
did teach endless punishment ; but the mere use of aionios in this 
connection by any Father, does not even raise a presumption that 
he so taught; the word being perfectly indefinite in itself, and used 
by outspoken universalists. When all the facts are fully weighed, I 
must adhere to this as the fairest test of Patristic teaching, viz., 
that no hypothesis other than strong conviction of its truth can 
account for universalistic teaching; while the desire to terrify sinners,, 
and still more the doctrine of Reserve easily accounts for apparent 
or even real inconsistency, which we sometimes find in the Fathers. 



106 WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



Fortunately we have the means of verifying" 
our anticipations. We can call two witnesses 
to the diffusion of universalism whose testimony 
it is impossible to gainsay. 

S. Jerome (and no more competent witness can exist), 
writing towards the end of the fourth century, says, — " I 
" know that most persons understand by the story of 
" Nineveh and its king, the ultimate forgiveness of the Devil 
" and all rational creatures." Now if most believed the 
ultimate salvation of every evil spirit, ought we not to say 
that all, or nearly all, believed in the more moderate dogma 
of universal human salvation in S. Jerome' s day? But there 
is another witness of slightly later date and of equal weight. 
S. Agustine tells us that, in his days, there were not only 
some, but " very many " or " the majority" — quam plurimi 
- " who compassionated the eternal punishment of the 
" damned, and believed that it would not take place." — 
Enchir., 112. The significance of such testimonies is very 
great indeed. They place on record the all important fact, 
that universalism was the belief of half, or more than 
half the Latin Church in the fifth century; and if so 
it would be far more widely held in the East, where 
the influence of the great Greek Fathers was more felt. 

But any sketch of universalism would be 
incomplete, without a discussion of the assertion 
still repeated though often refuted, that the 
dogma of the final salvation of all men was con- 
demned, in the person of Origen, at the Fifth 
Council. 

This assertion is, as will be distinctly shewn, untrue. 
An attempt was indeed made to procure a condem- 
nation of this doctrine — an attempt which wholly failed ; 
and which was made, not at the Fifth Council, but at 
the Home Synod of Constantinople (i.e., a committee of 
Bishops from a small number of sees near Constantinople, 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



107 



who, with some officers of the Metropolitan Church, formed 
a standing council for the Patriarch). For a clearer under- 
standing of the facts, which are at once important, and very 
generally misunderstood; it must be premised that the larger 
hope was but a very inconsiderable part of what was known 
as ' Origenism,' and quite independant of it. Origenism 
meant a widely spreading system, embracing many fanciful 
and crude speculations on the Trinity ; on pre-existence of 
souls ; on cycles of probation ; on personality ; on the 
resurrection body ; on the insecure bliss of the saved. 
These speculations it was that led Origen into disrepute ; 
and not his belief in the final salvation of all men. The 
proofs of this are abundant and decisive, i. Those who 
taught simple universalism even more decidedly than 
Origen, e.g., Clement, of Alexandria, and Gregory, of 
Nyssa, were held in universal honour, ii. The larger hope 
was, in fact, widely held by those who opposed Origen in 
everything else. iii. We have several lists of the alleged 
errors of Origen, from 300 down* to 404, A.D., in none of 
them is any mention of the larger hope. I may instance the 
list of Methodius, 300, a.d., that given by Pamphilus 
and Eusebius, in their Apology, 310, A.D.; that of 
Eustathius, 380, a.d.; two lists of Epiphanius, 376 and 
394, a.d.; and several of Theophiltjs, about 400, A.D. 
The two last named bitter enemies of Origen. iv. — So far 
from the larger hope, as we understand it, being something 
peculiar to Origen, it is very doubtful if his doctrine 
of restoration did not mean a totally different thing, 
i.e., restoration and then a fresh start, and the chance 
of again falling; and so on and on for ever. From 
what has been stated, it is absolutely certain that to 
condemn " Origen," or " Origenism " is not to condemn the 
larger hope, I now turn to the facts of the asserted condem- 
nation of Origen, which are these :— In 541 the Emperor 
J ustinian caused the Patriarch Mennas to convene at 
Constantinople the Home Synod, expressly to condemn the 
larger hope, and certain other opinions of Origen. " This 
" Synod passed fifteen Canons, in which various theories of 
" Origen were condemned, but deliberately omitted " that 



108 WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



concerning the larger hope, i.e., deliberately refused to 
condemn it. Twelve years later was convened the Fifth 
CouDcil, (born in intrigue and unrecognised by the English 
Church). It is said, but the fact is disputed by many able 
and impartial writers, to have condemned Origen by name 
in general terms, which, as I have shewn above, proves 
nothing at all as to the condemnation of the larger hope. 
Further, special reasons exist which render any intention to 
condemn universalism on the part of the Fifth Council in 
the highest degree unlikely, i. The promoters were them- 
selves Origenists. ii. The object of the Council was to 
condemn certain Nestorian tenets, quite distinct from univer- 
salism. iii. The Council expressly referred to S. Gregory 
of Nyssa, as a prop of the faith, who was the most 
outspoken universalist of all the Fathers ! Such is the 
true story of the so-called condemnation of universalism. 
The Home Synod distinctly refused to condemn it, even at 
the Emperor's bidding, while if, as is doubtful,* the Fifth 
Council did condemn Origen it did not thereby condemn 
the larger hope ; nor am I aware that this special point 
was ever submitted to any ancient general council for 
decision. 

I do not propose to follow the story of ancient 
universalism farther. In the middle of the fifth 
century we have seen excellent reason to con- 
clude that it was the creed of more than half 
Christendom. 

But darker days were at hand. The age of the great 
Greek Fathers was over, and in the centuries that succeed 
we have ignorance increasing, and manifold corruptions 
overspreading the earlier faith. Of these centuries a dismal 
picture might with truth be drawn — a venal clergy, a 
superstitious people, and ignorance abounding; so that 
probably in the West very few could so much as read the 



* I have not space to state the reasons for these doubts. 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



109 



Scriptures in the original. Add to all this the dark shadow 
of S. Agustine's cruel theology, then supreme; and we 
have enough to account for the adoption of a harsher and 
narrower creed as to the future life, by the Church in 
general. But this creed was mercy itself compared with our 
modern traditions, leaving as it did a door of hope widely 
open beyond the grave, to all but a very few exceptionally 
great sinners. Further, in estimating S. Augustine's 
claim to decide on so momentous a question, let us remem- 
ber that (i.) he was for most of his youth and early man- 
hood, a profligate and a Manichee, traces of which latter 
are quite visible in his theological system, (ii ) was, it may be 
said, the virtual author of the cruel heresy of Calvinism, 
(iii.) was admittedly, — Conf i., 14, imperfectly acquainted 
with Greek (a fact in itself an absolute disqualification for 
a teacher on this point) — iv., writes waveringly and feebly 
on the subject of future punishment.- — See Enchir. lxvii, 
ix., cxii — De civ. Dei, xxi. Yet the earlier faith was by 
no means wholly dead. From amid the prevailing cor- 
ruption and darkness, voices were still raised at intervals 
to proclaim the larger hope. A striking instance is that 
furnished by the case of the famous J ohn Scotus Erigena, 
who in the ninth century, as the result of a careful study 
of the Greek Fathers, proclaimed distinctly the doctrine of 
universal salvation. Nor are later instances wanting " Both 
" St. Thomas Aquinas, and Durandus shew us that, 
" even in their day, absolute universalism was not unknown. 
" It was the opinion of the school of Gilbert of Poictiers — 
" St. Thomas Aquinas, Sent. iv. 45, — and ' aliquorum 
"juristarum' — Durandas," — Mercy and Judgment, p. 45. 
Again, a great name, St. Anselm, in the twelfth century, 
writes thus : "It is quite foreign to God's nature to suffer 
" any reasonable creature wholly to perish." — Cur Bens 
Homo, ii. 4, a striking proof of the sur vival of the earlier 
hope ; " nor," adds the saint, " is it possible for the reason- 
*' able mind to think otherwise." To these testimonies may 
be added a highly interesting prayer, quoted by the Dean 
of Wells from an old English manual, The Fifteen O's, 
published by Caxton, and illustrating the dominant tone 



110 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



of religious feeling in England, in the age immediately 
preceding the Reformation : — "Be merciful to those souls 
"for whom there is no hope * # in their torment, 
" save that they were made in thine image * * Put forth 
" thy right hand and free them from the interminable pains 
" and anguish of hell, and lead them to the fellowship of the 
" citizens on high." 

No doubt some will say : but does not the 
very fact that this belief in an endless Hell was 
permitted to spread so widely prove its truth? 
If so, I reply, why not then carry out your 
theory ? Is transubstantiation true because it 
has prevailed so widely ? Papal infallibility is a 
belief very widely spread ; is it therefore to be 
accepted ? The cultus of the Blessed Virgin is 
very wide spread ; is it therefore Scriptural ? 
Instances without end might be added. In fact, 
no more groundless beliel can be pointed out 
than this, that the prevalence of an opinion is a 
proof of its truth. Are they who hold this 
strange opinion prepared to join the Church of 
Rome, and accept the supremacy of the Pope, 
because this belief is that of the vast majority 
of Christians in the Western Church ? It has 
pleased God to permit in numberless cases error 
to prevail, and obscure in this present age His 
truth. This very fact is but a louder call to us 
to work against all that hides or distorts that 
truth. Nay, it points not uncertainly to a con- 
clusion in perfect agreement with the larger hope; 
this namely, that the present is but an initial 
stage of being; one of many ages, during which 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. Ill 



God is slowly, very slowly, working out a vast 
plan, and permits for a moment, as it were, an 
apparent triumph to error and to evil. 

Let us now pass on and see what our own 
Church teaches on this point. We shall I think 
find, if we examine it carefully, in our Book of 
Common Prayer — moulded as it is on primitive 
lines — not a few testimonies in favour of the 
larger hope. Go, for instance, into any of our 
Churches at the service of Holy Baptism — what 
is the profession of faith required from the 
sponsors, how does it end ? " Dost thou believe 
u in everlasting life after death," and not a word 
or hint further. How suggestive, is it not ? 

Again, in our Litany do we not pray that it 
may please God to have mercy, not on some 
men, but on all men ? Is this not the larger 
hope ? Do we not also address, in the same 
Litany, Jesus Christ as the u Lamb of God that 
" taketh away the sins of the world," and that 
twice over ? Do we not in Holy Communion 
repeat, three times in one prayer, this touching 
and truly Catholic address to Christ, as 
"taking away the sins of the world?" And 
here it is right to ask, are words mere 
counters, a mere pretence, and that in 
our holiest moments ? How does Christ take 
away the sins of the world, if to all eternity 
in Hell the sins of any men remain not taken 



112 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



away? On this point our Book of Common 
Prayer is specially emphatic, for in the proper 
preface for Easter-day we are bidden to remem- 
ber how Christ " hath taken away the sins of the 
"world; and has by His death destroyed death" 
But to abolish death in its Scriptural meaning is 
surely to abolish all that the Fall brought on man. 
Take next another instance : in one of her 
Ember-day collects, the Church bids us thus 
pray: "To those who shall be ordained to any 
" holy function, grant Thy grace that they may 
"set forth Thy glory, and set forward the 
" salvation of all men." Does the salvation of all 
men mean the damnation of most men ; of any 
man? Again, I need not remind you how we 
pray "for all sorts and conditions of men; that 
" God's saving health may reach all nations." 
And so too, when the Church bids us render 
thanks for a world redeemed, and for our creation, 
no less than for our redemption, how can this be 
if creation be not a certain promise of good ? If 
creation does, as a matter of fact, imply an 
awful unutterable risk of Hell's torment, why 
bid a man give thanks for that which may be to 
him an occasion of endless pains ? 

I will next ask your attention to a fact perhaps not always 
remembered, that our Church deliberately expunged that 
article of hers which (adopted in 1552) condemned the 
belief in the final salvation of all men. " The 42nd article 
"was withdrawn," (says the Bishop of Manchester) 
" because the Church, knowing, that men like Origen, 
"Clement, and Gregory of Nyssa, were universalists, 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



IIS 



" refused to dogmatise on such questions." Nor are other 
indications wanting of the hopeful teaching of our Prayer 
Book. Let us not fail to note the hope expressed for all 
in the Burial Service ; the stress laid on the wide extent of 
the Atonement in the Catechism, and in the General Con- 
fession ; the true force of all this is best seen when our 
formularies are compared with those of other reformed 
communions, (a comparison for which I have not space). 
In a word the tone of the Book of Common Prayer is 
frequently that indicated in the Collect for the Sunday 
before Easter — where the object of Christ's death is 
described as this : " That all mankind should follow the 
" example of His great humility," and in that other prayer, 
which addresses God as one " whose property is always to 
"have mercy;" words which, if taken in their full meaning, 
certainly teach the larger hope. 

But there is further important evidence of our 
Church's teaching. Of Christ-'s descent into 
Hades I have already spoken, and pointed out 
that to teach the liberation of all souls thence, is 
to teach universalism. 

And this liberation of all, it can, I think, be shewn that 
our Church teaches : For the Church has intimated her 
belief in the fact of Christ's descent into Hades, and 
preaching there, by the selection of St. Ppfer, iii. 16, as the 
epistle for Easter Eve, and of Zech. ix., as the first lesson 
(see v. 11, and its striking allusion to the "prisoners of 
"hope.") Further in the Homily (of the Resurrection) 
appointed for Easter Day, we have the result of Christ's 
preaching in Hades stated in the following words : — " He 
" destroyed the Devil and all his tyranny, and took from 
" him all his captives, and hath raised and set them with 
" Himself among the heavenly citizens above. His death 
"destroyed Hell and all the damnation thereof '." These 
words are, as I think, clear, and teach the liberation of all 



114 WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



souls, without exception, from Hades : a point plainly 
equivalent to asserting Universalism. — (See page 80). 
Lastly let me call attention to a serious point arising out of 
the Atonement. Art. xxxi. says, " The offering of Christ 
" is a perfect redemption, propitiation, and satisfaction for 
"all the sins of the whole world." But if all the sins of the 
■whole world have been perfectly atoned for, how can any of 
these sins be eternally punished 1 Christ either did satisfy 
all claims by His death or He did not. If He did, what 
becomes of the popular creed ? How can sins already 
atoned for, and taken away be visited with endless retribu- 
tion % If He did not, what becomes of the Atonement % 

Nor has the larger hope wanted able defen- 
ders in English theology since the days of 
the Prayer Book. It is interesting to note 
that amid the tumults of the Rebellion and the 
gross profligacy of the Restoration, there rose 
and flourished a school of devout men, trained, 
most of them, at Cambridge ; partly Anglican, 
partly Nonconformists, who advocated the larger 
hope. One of the earliest was Gerald 
Wlnstanley, who taught a complete restoration 
of the whole creation in the Mystery of God, 
printed 1669. To nearly the same epoch belong 
two very remarkable names, Ralph Cudworth 
and Henry More, who^e sympathies were 
distinctly in favour of the larger hope. More 
out-spoken in his teaching was Peter Sterry, 
fellow of Emmanuel College, Cambridge — one of 
Cromwell's chaplains — whose works published 
(after his death) in 1*683 and 1710, evidence 
marked ability, and are now of great rarity and 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 115 



value. I may note next, as of the same school 
of thought, Sadler, author of Olbia, and 
Whichcote, a friend of Cud worth and More, a 
fellow of Emmanuel College, a contemporary of 
Milton and Jeremy Taylor ; and two less 
known authors, R. Coppln, 1655, and W. 
Erbury. At this time there also appeared not a 
few anonymous books, advocating the wider 
hope, which deserve mention, as Illustrating the 
course of theological enquiry in the 17th century, 
e.g., Enochian walks ivith God, and The revelation 
of the everlasting gospel message, by the same 
author ; and God's light, 1653 ; also Of the 
torments of [I ell, the foundation shaken, 1658. A 
more distinguished advocate of the larger hope 
was Bishop Rust, successor of Jeremy Taylor, 
author of De veritate, and A letter concerning the 
opinions of Origen. Another name almost 
equally eminent is that of Jeremy White, 
Fellow of Trinity, Cambridge, chaplain to 
Cromwell, and author of The restoration of all 
tilings, published (after his death) in 1712 ; a 
book, I may add, eloquent, devout, and breath- 
ing the deepest reverence for Holy Scripture. 
Towards the close of the 17th century, came 
Tillotson, who seems to have held that God 
was not bound to execute his threatenings pro- 
no anced against sinners, a view in. which he was 
followed more decisively by Bishop Stilling- 
fleet, and by Dr. Burnet, Master of the Charter 
House, a pupil of his at Cambridge, who, in his 



116 WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



De statu mortuorum, teaches universalism openly. 
A few years later we meet some distinguished 
names advocating distinctly the same views, Dr. 
Cheyne, in his Discourses, published 1 742, and 
(probably) Bishop Warburton. — See ch. vi. note 
on Rev. xx. iv., Bishop Newton, 1750, in a 
sermon on the Final state of man ; and William 
Law, 1766, in his Letters and Way to Divine 
knoivledge. To this era belong also two books, 
little known, De vitd functorum statu, by J. 
Windet, and Glad tidinqs to Jews and Gentiles, 
by R. Clarke, both published in 1763, and both 
advocating the larger hope. Later still are the 
names of Elhanan Winchester, a follower of 
* Wesley, author of Dialogues on universal resto- 
ration, and fin the earlier part of the present 
century) that of T. Ersktne, of Linlathan. 
/To these may be added Bishop Ewing, of Argyll, 
C. Kingsley, F. D. Maurice, C. Bronte, John 
Foster, E. B. Browning, General Gordon, and 
the late Bishop Wilberforce, (tide Canon 
Farrar). Of living divines not a few of the 
most distinguished might be added to the list just 
given, as sympathizing with, or openly teaching 



* There is some strong evidence connecting J. Weslry s latest 
views with universalistic teaching. He published in 1787 as " one 
" of the most sensible tract* he had ever read," a transition from 
Bonnet's Palingenesie Philosophique, which seems to he charac- 
terised hy an outspoken universalism. e.g., it teaches '• There will 
"he a perpetual advance of all the individuate of humanity towards 
" perfection " (in the other life.). 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. Ill 



universalism. One eminent name will occur to 
most, that of Canon Westcott, and another is the 
present Bishop of Manchester^ 

The evidence already given shows at least that 
the Catholic Church leaves her children perfectly 
free on this question of universalism, which so 
many of her most eminent sons openly taught. 
And let us carefully note, 1 — that the Patristic 
evidence in favour of the larger hope is stronger 
in the early centuries than in the later ; 2 — is 
stronger in the days of the Fathers than of the 
Schoolmen ; 3 — is stronger in the great Greek 
Fathers than in the Latins ; is stronger where 
the light of learning and piety is the brightest, 
is weaker as both decline ; 4 — nor does the 
belief in an endless Hell become general, until 
the light of learning was quite extinct in the 
Church ; 5 — and even then it was so completely 
tempered by the doctrine of Purgatory as to 
have lost, practically, nearly all its terror. In 
truth there is incontrovertible evidence of the 
wide-spread belief in universalism in the earliest 
centuries : proof equally clear that the Catholic 
Church has nowhere condemned it : and abun- 
dant reason to think that these views were often 
held, where no open expression of them 
was made ; and even where, owing to the 
doctrine of Beserve, language apparently incon- 
sistent with them was held in public. " Of 
"course," writes Cardinal Newman, "I was 



118 WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



" aware that several of the Fathers are in favour 
" of the restitution of all things. " Of the first 
five centuries, Mr. Oxenham thus writes : " The 
" doctrine of endless punishment was not believed 
" at all by some of the holiest and wisest of the 
" Fathers, and was not taught as an integral 
" part of the Christian faith by any even of those 
u who belived it as an opinion." " In primitive 
" Christianity," says Dcederlin, " the more lofty 
" and eminent the teacher, the more he held and 
" defended the hope that punishments would one 
"day end." 

Here I had intended to close this chapter, 
but so very little is known of Patristic teaching 
that some readers will, no doubt, welcome a 
few more extracts, chiefly from S. Gregory 
of Nyssa, to shew how uncompromising was 
primitive universalism — a universalism which 
extended to the ultimate salvation of every 
fallen angel and evil spirit ; and which he 
taught as in the very fullest harmony with the 
Catholic Faith, of which he was, perhaps, the most 
distinguished champion in his day. Writing on 
the 54th Ps. v. 17., "In these words," he says, 
" Is declared the object of the Divine plan with 
" regard to mankind. God's aid suffered not man 
" to remain in the confines of Hades, but # pro- 
" vided a remedy equal to the pains of sin. * In 
" this, hinting at a very glorious truth that evil is 
u not eternal * * by which God shews that 



WHAT THE CHURCH' TEACHES. 



119 



" neither is sin from eternity, nor will it last to 
" eternity. For that which did not always exist 
" shall not last for ever; and the manner in which 
" evil is abolished is shewn by the Jews slaying 
"our Lord, which predicts the abolition of sin. 
"* * * The Lord will, in his just judgement, 
" destroy the wickedness of sinners ; not their 
" nature ; * # * wickedness being thus des- 
" troyed, and its imprint being left in none, we 
"shall all be fashioned after Christ, and in all 
" that one character shall shine, which originally 
"was imprinted on our nature." My readers 
cannot fail to note in this interesting passage 
these amongst other points. L The assertion 
that from its very nature evil cannot endure for 
ever. 2. The declaration which S. Gregory 
delights to make of the certain reversion of our 
nature (in every case) to its original type, i.e., to 
conformity to the image of God. 3. The teach- 
ing as to God's judgement, being the destruction 
not of the sinner but of his sin : a point on which 
S. Jerome, too, is emphatic, as the following 
quotation from him shews : — " When the 
" Psalmist says, ' Thine enemies, 0 God, shall 
"perish,' * every one who has been thine enemy 
" shall hereafter be made thy friend ; the man 
" shall not perish, the enemy shall perish. He 
" who was an enemy shall be thy friend, and so 
" the enemy shall perish." — In Ps. 91. On these 
points let us hear S. Gregory once more, 
writing on Ps. vii. 6, " Arise, 0 Lord, in thy 



120 WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



" wrath, and exult over the end of thine 
" enemies " (so the words run in S. Gregory's 
text), "The term 'wrath,'" he says, "shews 
" the retributive power of the just judge, and 
" for the rest the extinction of sin : for that alone 
" is contrary to nature which is seen to be 
" opposed to good, which is sin, whose end is 
" extinction and a return to nothingness " He then 
goes on to explain that to put an end to the 
enemies of God, means not to allow to human 
life any power of turning to evil ; " For as the 
u end of disease is health, so here the Psalmist 
" calls the change of the nature of mankind, from 
" evil to a state of blessedness, the end of ( God's) 
"enemies." Here let us notice the stress laid 
on wrath, justice, and retribution, and the con- 
clusion so strictly drawn, that these involve the 
termination of sin. As S. Jerome, in a passage 
already quoted, puts it thus, " Seeing the spirit 
" (of man) proceeds from GrOD,it is not just that 
"they should perish eternally who are sustained 
" by His breath and spirit. " 

Again 8. Gregory writes on the 56th Psalm. "For the 
" nature of sin is unstable and transitory * * nor shall it 
"last for ever in the universe. * * It is like a plant on a 
" house top, not rooted, not sown, not ploughed in, and 
" though for the present it may thrive with its unsubstantial 
" shoot, yet in the times to come, in the restoration to 
" goodness of all things, it passes away and vanishes. So 
"not even a trace of the evil which now abounds in us shall 
" remain, in the life that is promised as an object of our 
"hope. So, too, writing on Psalm cvii. 42; "And all 
" iniquity shall stop her mouth," this Father says, " How 



WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. 



121 



" blessed is that life in which the mouth of iniquity shall be 
" for ever stopped. This is the crown of all blessings, the 
" head of all hope * * that nature shall no longer be 
" troubled by wickedness, but that all transgression shall 
" be put away ; that is to say, the very inventor of trans- 
" gression (the Devil). For this is signified by the cora- 
" prehensive word all." 

Again, on Psalm cl. 5. "Praise Him upon the high- 
" sounding cymbals," there is a very striking comment. 
^ These cymbals," he says, "joined with cymbals, show 
"the (future) harmony between the human and the angelic 
" natures, when human nature shall have attained its end. 
" One cymbal is the heavenly nature of the angels. The 
" other is the rational creation of mankind ; but sin 
" separated the one from the other, which, when at last the 
" goodness of God shall have united, then shall both, made 
" one, chant forth that hymn, as the great Apostle says, 
" ' Every tongue, of things in Heaven, and on earth, and 
" under the earth, shall confess that Christ is Lord, to the 
"glory of God the Father.' Which done, the cymbals 
"shall chant their song of victory * * all enmity 
" being extinguished ; which being tvfiolly * * ex- 
" tinguished and reduced to nothingness, ceaselessly shall be 
" rendered by every spirit alike, praise to God for ever : 
" in that day, as there shall be no longer any sinner (sin no 
"more existing), every spirit must then praise the Lord." 
S. Gregory proceeds, " Such is the meaning of this final 
" Psalm, in which all sins being ivholly abolished, praise 
"shall be sung to God; which praise alike contains (implies) 
" our being incapable of turning to sin, and unites our song 
" with God's glory ; ivhen every created being shall be 
"harmonised into one choir, and when, like a cymbal, the 
" reasonable creation, and that which is now severed by sin, 
" shall pour forth a pleasing strain, due to mutual harmonj^. 
" .• * Then shall every spirit praise God for ever, pro- 
claiming His grace and abounding with an increase of 
" joy to all eternity." 



CHAPTER V. 



« WHAT THE OLD TESTAMENT TEACHES." 

"From the time at which this great and far-reaching promise 
"or gospel was given to Abraham, the universal scope of the Divine 
" redemption is insisted on with growing emphasis, even in those 
" Hebrew Scriptures, which we too often assume to be animated only 
" by a local and national spirit." — Salvator Mundi. 

From the Church I next turn to the Old 
Testament. There we shall find abundant, 
perhaps to many readers, unexpected confirmation 
of the larger hope, though I can merely attempt 
to give an outline, and that a brief one, of its 
teaching. True, in the Old Testament, the 
promises are, it may be said, mainly temporal ; 
but still we have unmistakeable evidence of a 
plan of mercy revealed in its pages, and destined 
to embrace all men. Nor need this interpreta- 
tion of the older volume of God's word rest on 
mere conjecture: let me call as a witness, no less 
a person than the Apostle S. Peter. He shall 
tell us wdiat the true teaching of the Old 
Testament on this subject is. The Apostle in 
one of the very earliest of his addresses, Acts hi. 
21, takes occasion to explain the real purpose of 
God in Jesus Christ. There is to come, finally, 
a time of universal restoration, "restitution of all 



WHAT THE OLD TESTAMENT TEACHES. 123 



" things." He adds the significant words that 
God has promised this " by the mouth of all 
" His holy Prophets since the world began ;" 
and therefore we who teach this hope are but 
following in the steps of all God's holy Prophets. 
Thus S. Peter would have us go to the Old 
Testament, and weave, as it were its varied 
predictions into one concordant whole : gather 
its sacred promises till they, with one voice, 
proclaim the restitution of all things. 

It is not my design minutely to consider the 
varied promises of blessing to all men contained 
in the Old Testament, though they can be traced 
almost everywhere. At the very moment 
of the fall, is given a promise, that the 
serpent's head shall be bruised, intimating 
a complete overthrow. Two points are very 
significant here. The promise is not of the 
serpent's wounding, but of his destruction; 
and next the promise, so far reaching, is conveyed 
in close connection with a terrible judgement 
(see ch. ix. on Judgement). It is part of the 
sentence, it is embedded, so to speak, in it. 
Further, with the promise to Abraham was 
blended an intimation of blessing to the 
race of man ; to all the families of the 
earth. And this intimation of a world-wide 
blessing, as has been often pointed out, grows 
more frequent as the stream of revelation flows 
on. We find that in the Law, the Psalms, and 



124 WHAT THE OLD TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



the Prophets, are traces, clear and distinct of 
universal blessing of hope for all. Thus of 
the teaching of the Law a fundamental 
part rested on the institutions of the ' first 
fruits/ and the ' first born.' Elsewhere in this 
volume has been pointed out the extreme 
significance of this as bearing on the larger hope, 
and as fulfilled in Jesus Christ. For the 'first 
fruits ' pledge the entire harvest (." if the first 
fruit be holy the lump is also holy " — Romans 
xi. 16), and the ' first born ' include the entire 
family, and not a part merely. But Christ is the 
' first born', and the ' first fruits', and thus sums 
up in Himself, not a part of the race, but the 
entire race. In other words, Christ as the 'first 
born,' stands pledged to see every son of Adam's 
race; as the ' first fruits,' to save the entire harvest. 
So are His elect said to be "a kind of ' first fruits' " 
and the 'first born ' (" Israel is my son, even my 
'first born'"); and therefore in their salvation is 
renewed pledge of the salvation of the entire 
human race, without any exception ; thus, too, 
light falls on the true meaning of the Divine 
election as carrying with it a pledge of universal 
salvation. 

" The Psalmists again are full of the largest 
"and happiest forecasts. When they speak of the 
u coming Messiah, they are at the farthest from 
" claiming the blessings of His reign exclusively 
" for themselves; on the contrary, they say, 'His 



WHAT THE OLD TESTAMENT TEACHES. 125 



" name shall endure for ever : His name shall be 
''continued as long as the sun; and men shall 
"be blessed in Him ; all nations shall call Him 
"blessed' * # "They constantly breathe forth 
"the invitation, '0 praise the Lord all ye 
"nations; praise Him all ye people." — Salvator 
Mundi, p. 178. Let me further instance such 
words as these, " unto Thee shall all flesh come." 
Other examples of the same address to all 
nations — to all peoples — bidding them join in 
God's praise, and surely anticipating that they 
would one day do so, are frequent in the Psalms. 
Take for example those our Prayer Book has 
made familiar, e.g. Cantate Domino. It is not 
alone the house of Israel that shares God's 
mercy and truth, but all the ends of the world 
are declared to have seen the salvation of our 
God — see Is. xi. 5 — and so in the next verse 
all lands are bidden to shew themselves joyful 
unto the Lord. To the same effect is the familiar 
clause of the Jubilate, " 0 be joyful in the Lord 
" all ye lands." In fine, in this spirit the 
Psalter closes with the noble, far- sounding strain, 
" let everything that hath breath, praise the Lord." 
In this universal hope is to be found the true 
spirit of the Psalmists, in these invitations 
addressed, not to Israel, but to all nations. 

To shew how deeply this idea is embedded in 
the Psalter, let me add a few more passages. 
" All nations shall do Him service." — Ps. lxxii. 



126 WHAT THE OLD TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



11. "Thou shalt inherit all the nations." — Ps. 
lxxxii. 8. " All nations shall come and worship 
« Thee."— Ps. lxxxvi. 9. " All the earth shall 
" worship Thee." — Ps. lxvi. 4. " Sing unto the 
"Lord all the whole earth" — Ps. xcvi. 1. "All 
" the earth shall be filled with His Majesty."— 
Ps. lxxii. 19. "Let all flesh give thanks unto 
" His holy name, for ever and ever." — Ps. cxlv. 
21. Lastly, take these words — " All the ends of 
" the world shall remember and turn unto the 
" Lord, and all the kindreds of the nations shall 
" worhip before Thee." — Ps. xxii. 27.* 

Of the greater Prophets the same is true; 
though I need not speak in detail of them. From 
amid their varied contents, at times break forth 
promises of the widest, amplest hope; anticipa- 
tions of a time of universal bliss and joy, of a 
world in which all pain and sorrow shall have 
passed away. But these passages are in the 
main familiar to you, and I need hardly quote 
them. They have found the way to the heart 
of Christendom, and have stamped themselves 
on its literature. " Take, however, only this one 
" sentence from the evangelical Prophet, and 
" take it mainly because S. Paul echoes it back, 
" and interprets it as he echoes it. It is Jehovah 



* This text has a special significance on account of the close con- 
nection of this Psalm with the Atonement ; as a result of which all 
the ends of the world shall turn as it predicts unto the Lord. 



WHAT THE OLD TESTAMENT TEACHES. 127 



44 who speaks these words by the mouth of 
"Isaiah: 'Look unto Me and be ye saved, all 
44 ye ends of the earth: for I am God and there 
44 is none other: I have sworn by myself and 
44 the word is gone out of my mouth in righteous- 
44 ness and shall not return, that unto me every 
44 knee shall bow and every tongue confess.' 
44 Could any words more emphatically declare 
44 it to be the divine purpose that the whole earth, 
44 to the very end of it shall be saved ; that every 
"knee shall bend in homage before God, and 
44 every tongue take the oath of fealty to Him ? 
<4 Are we not expressly told that this declaration, 
44 since it has come from the righteous mouth of 
44 God, cannot return unto Him void, but must 
44 accomplish its object; that object being the 
44 salvation ot the human race ? S. Paul echoes 
44 this great word in the epistle to the Philippians, 
44 and though on his lips it gains definiteness and 
44 precision, assuredly it loses no jot or tittle of its 
44 breadth: he affirms, Phil. ii. 9-11, 4 That God 
44 hath highly exalted Him, and given Him a 
44 name which is above every name, in order that 
44 at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow; 
44 not only every knee of man — for now the 
44 promise grows incalculably wider — but every 
44 knee in Heaven and on earth, and under the 
44 earth: and that every tongue shall confess that 
44 Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the 
44 Father.' It is hard to understand Isaiah as 
44 proclaiming less than a universal redemption, 



« 



128 WHAT THE OLD TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



"but if S. Paul did not mean to proclaim a 
" redemption as wide as the universe, what use or 
" force is there in words ?" — Salvator Mundi. 

And remember how full are the Prophets, and 
the Psalms no less, of pictures of the vastness of 
the divine mercy, of His tenderness that never 
fails. Even from amid the sadness of the 
Lamentations we hear a voice assuring us that 
" God will not cast off for ever, but though He 
" cause grief, yet will He have compassion 
" according to the multitude of His mercies." — 
Lam. iii. 31. Or take these words of Isaiah: 

I will not contend for ever, neither will I be 
"always wroth! for the spirit should fail before 
"me, or the souls which I have made." — Isaiah 
lvii. 16. This idea is a favourite one; the 
contrast between the short duration of God's 
anger and the enduring eternal character of His 
love. u So in a little wrath I hid my face from 
u thee for a moment, but with everlasting kind- 

ness will I have mercy on thee, saith the Lord 
" Thy Redeemer." — Is. liv. 8. Let us pause here 
for a moment to dwell on the significance of this 
fact of the limited duration of the divine anger, 
so clearly taught in the Old Testament. Take a 
few instances, " I am merciful saith the Lord, I 
" will not keep anger for ever." — Jer. iii. 12. 
" His anger endureth but a moment." — Ps. 
xxx. 5. "He will not always chide neither 
" keepeth He His anger for ever." — Ps. ciii. 9. 



WHAT THE OLD TESTAMENT TEACHES. 129 



" He retaineth not His anger for ever, because 
" He delighteth in mercy." — Mic. vii. 18. But 
if this be true what beeorn.es of the popular creed? 
If God's anger is temporary, how can it be 
endless? If it endure but a moment how can it 
last for ever ? 

We have spoken of the pictures of universal 
blessedness that are to be found in the greater 
Prophets, ''perhaps," says the author already 
quoted, " some of you may not be equally 
"familiar with the fact that these same pictures 
" are also to be found in the minor prophets 
(a fact very suggestive) that " every one of these 
"brief poems, or collections of poems, has its tiny 
" Apocalypse. And mark this point well, while 
" each of the minor Prophets sees the vision 
" of a whole world redeemed to the love and 
" service of righteousness, this vision of redemp- 
" tion is invariably accompanied by a vision of 
''''judgement.' 1 '' The significance of this will be 
seen when we come in a later chapter (ch. ix.) to 
discuss what the true meaning is of these divine 
judgements, which are too often regarded as 
merely implying God's wrath. 

At least, if not all, yet very many of the 
minor Prophets do predict the coming of a time 
universal redemption. So HosEAxiii.14, exclaims, 
<£ 0 death, I will be thy plagues. 0 grave, I will 



130 WHAT THE OLD TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



" be thy destruction." — (See 1 Cor. xv. 55. ). So 
Joel ii. 28, tells of the spirit as being poured 
upon all flesh. Habbukuk can look beyond the 
terrors of judgement and see the 44 earth filled 
44 with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, 
"as the waters cover the sea" — ch. ii. 14. Is not 
this wonderful ? Can you not enter into S. 
Peter's words as he stood forth, while yet 
Christianity was scarcely born, to proclaim as its 
glorious aim and scope, the universal restoration 
— the paradise of God regained for mankind — all 
things made new — Acts iii. 21. 

But I resume. In Zephaniah we read the 
same glorious prospect, the same universal hope. 
He speaks of God's judgements as being terrible 
to the nations, in order that 44 men may worship 
44 Him, every one from his place, even all the isles 
44 of the heathen" — ch. ii. 11. And again, in the 
same Prophet, we are told how God is to send 
His fiery judgements to purify men, 44 that they 
14 may all call upon the name of the Lord to 
44 serve Him with one consent " (ch. iii. 8-9). 
So Malachi closes the prophetic line with an 
intimation indeed of judgement — of a refining 
fire — but together with this, nay, in consequence 
of this, is the prospect unfolded, that from the 
44 rising of the sun unto the going down of the 
"same, God's name shall be great among the 
44 Gentiles, and in every place incense and pure 
44 offerings shall be offered to Him." — Ch. i. 11. 



WHAT THE OLD TESTAMENT TEACHES. 131 



Brief as the above survey has been, it has, I 
trust, served to indicate how, through all the 
Old Testament, the thread of universal hope 
runs: how the Prophets — Seers and Psalmists — 
of Israel did foreshadow a coming age; when 
sin should be no more, and sorrow and sighing 
should flee away for ever. To the New Testa- 
ment I propose to devote an examination more 
in detail, as its great importance demands, in the 
next chapter. 



CHAPTER VI. 



" WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES:' 

" And here I may briefly say, that to my own mind, the language 
" of the New Testament appears unequivocally to affirm the redemption 
" of all men; their actual redemption from this evil and diseased 
"state in which we now are ; the actual raising up of all to a per- 
fect life. To my own mind this universality seems to be clearly 
" expressed in Scripture." — Hinton, The Mystery of Pain. 

We now turn to an examination of the very 
numerous passages in the New Testament which 
clearly declare, or imply, the salvation of all men : 
how numerous these are, how distinct their 
teaching, we shall see. One thing only I ask, 
which common fairness and honesty require, that 
our Lord and His Evangelists and Apostles may 
be understood to mean what they say. Thus, to 
take a few instances out of man} 7 : when they 
speak of all men I assume them to mean all men, 
and not some men ; when they speak of all 
things I assume them to mean all things; when 
they speak of life and salvation as given to the 
world, I assume them to mean given, and not 
merely offered; when they speak of the destruc- 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 133 



tion of death, of the Devil, of the works of the 
Devil, I assume them to mean that these shall be 
destroyed and not preserved for ever in Hell ; 
when they tell us that the whole of creation suffers 
but that it shall be delivered, I assume they mean 
an actual deliverance of all created things; when 
they tell us that Redemption is wider, broader, 
and stronger than the Fall, I assume that they 
mean to tell us at least this, that all the evil 
caused by the Fall shall be swept away ; when 
they describe Christ's empire as extending over 
all things and all creatures, and tell us that every 
tongue must join in homage to Him, I assume 
them to mean what their words convey in their 
ordinary sense; if I did not, should I not, in 
fact, be making God a liar? 

" For the Son of Man is come to save that which 
is lost." S. Matt xviii. 1 1. 

Now the question is simply this, will Jesus 
Christ do what He has come to do? Will He 
save that which is lost, and not some of the lost 
merely, a totally different thing ? How can " the 
" lost " be saved, if countless myriads, as the 
popular creed teaches, shall be finally lost? nay, 
if any are finally lost, surely "that which is lost" 
is not saved. 

"The Kingdom of Heaven is like unto leaven 
which a woman took and hid in three 
measures of meal till the whole was 
leavened."— & Mat. xiii. 33; S. Luke xiii. 20-1. 

Here is a passage which assuredly teaches a 



134 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



universal salvation. The Kingdom of Heaven is 
set on this earth as leaven in meal ; and as the 
leaven works till the whole mass is leavened, so 
the Kingdom of Heaven is destined to leaven 
the whole earth, i.e., to save all men. You 
cannot limit the " meal " of the parahle in any 
way, it is the whole world that Christ claims as 
His Kingdom ; of the world He is the light, the 
life, the Saviour. All things are His and all 
souls, and all that Christ claims — " the whole" 
— shall one day be leavened. 

"All flesh shall see the salvation of God. 

S. Luke iii. 5. 

Quoted from Isaiah ; he says speaking of 
redemption, ch. xl., "Every valley shall be 
" exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be 
" made low, and the glory of the Lord shall be 
" revealed, and all flesh shall see it together. " 
Can you fairly reconcile these words with a 
partial salvation? Thus when the Prophet says 
in the same chapter, verse 6, "all flesh is grass," 
who doubts the universality of his words ; and if 
so, is it not a violation of all fairness in an 
exactly parallel case, to doubt the universality 
of the salvation? 

1 'Love your enemies, do good to them which 

HATE YOU * AND YE SHALL BE THE CHILDREN OF 

the Highest." — S. Luke vi. 27-35 ; S. Mat. v. 44. 

Note carefully the teaching of this whole 
passage. Shall God command us to love our 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 135 



enemies when He prepares an endless Hell for 
His own enemies? Shall God command us to 
bless and do good to those who hate us, when 
He means for ever to curse and do evil to those 
who hate Him? Does God then expect us to 
act on higher motives than He will Himself act ? 

" But when a stronger than he shall come upon 
him and overcome him, he taketh from him 
all his armour, wherein he trusted and 
divideth his spoils." S. Luke xi. 22.. 

Here it is asserted (a) that Christ is stronger 
than Satan, (b) that Christ will overcome 
Satan, (c) will take from him his whole 
armour, (d) will divide, i.e., take away his 
spoils, see p. 80-1. Each of these statements 
contradicts the popular creed, for that teaches 
(a) that evil is stronger than good, (b) that 
it overcomes good in numberless cases, (c) 
that Satan's power for evil is not taken away, 
but lasts practically for ever, (d) that his 
spoils — the souls he has captured — are not 
divided i.e., taken from him. 

"What man of you having an hundred sheep 
* IF he lose one of them doth not leave 

THE NINETY AND NINE * AND GO AFTER THAT 
WHICH IS LOST UNTIL HE FIND IT ?" — S. Luke XV. 4. 

" Yes," says a writer already quoted, as long 
" as there is one member of the race imperfect, 
u the shepherd parent is persuing it in love until 
"it be safely rested on his shoulders; and all 
" the rest of mankind are crying out for the 
" missing member, without which their own life 



186 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



" does not fully or freely vibrate. " See how 
broadly Christ puts the case. It was to all the 
publicans and sinners, v. 1, that He was speaking 
lest we might narrow His precious words to a 
few elect. And again, see how broadly He bases 
His argument, "what man of you," He asks 
" would not do this?" As though to assure us 
that in the common feeling of humanity, shared 
by even publicans and sinners, we have safe 
warrant to conclude that our Father will seek on 
and on till He find every erring child. Lastly, 
note how the straying sheep is represented as 
being the shepherd's loss. When man strays 
God is the loser, and Gon in seeking man is 
trying to retrieve His own loss. 

" What woman 1 having ten pieces of silver, 
if she lose one piece, both not light a 
candle and * seek diligently till she find 
it f S. Luke xv. 8. . 

Here is precisely the same broad human basis, 
and the same idea, the sense of loss is that of 
the owner i.e., God. Keep steadily in view three 
facts, which distinctly emerge from these parables: 

1 — our own feelings of love and pity are a safe 
guide to God's feelings ; " what man of you ?" 

2 — every lost soul is God's loss, who therefore 
may be trusted to seek its recovery ; and 3 — 
to seek till He find it. 

"For the Son of Man is come to seek and to 

SAVE THAT WHICH WAS LOST." — S. Luke xix. 10. 

If so, I gather from His own parables, and 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 137 



His essential nature, that so long as any thing is 
lost, Jesus Christ will go on seeking and saving; 
for is He not always the same? "The lost" 
are His charge, and not some of the lost, a very 
different thing, as I have before said. Shall any 
thing separate any lost one from His love ? Is 
He not Lord of the dead as truly as of the living? 
Did He not go from the bitter Cross to the lost 
spirits in prison, to preach, as S. Peter tells us, 
the Gospel to the dead. 

" The same came * * that all men through 
Him might believe." S. John i. 17. 

Yes, that all men might believe, that is indeed 
the Divine purpose — the purpose of Him who 
sent the Baptist. But who is there that shall 
say, that what God purposes to do He will fail 
to accomplish ? I know that He cannot fail : 
I read distinctly of the immutability of His 
counsel (Htb. vi. 17). Am I to believe that the 
immutable purpose of the unchanging God shall 
come to nothing ? 

" Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away 
the sin of the world." S. John i. 29. 

How could the extent of the work of Christ 
be more distinctly intimated? It is the world's 
sin, and not less, that he takes away. But, if it 
is taken away how can there be an endless Hell 
for its punishment ? Is all this merely playing 
with words ? Have we come to asserting that of 
God's word ? 



138 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



"For God sent not His Son into the world 
to condemn the world ; but that the world 
through Him might be saved." — S. John iii. 17. 

Again, the same plain statement, as to the 
world's salvation and God's purpose to save it ; 
and again I ask, are we to believe God when 
He tells us that His purpose in Redemption is 
the salvation of the w r orld ; and assures us by His 
Prophets that His word shall not return unto 
Him void, but shall accomplish that which He 
pleases. 

" The Father loveth the Son, and hath given 
all things into his hand " S. John iii. 35. 

The relevance of this is obvious, " all that the 
"Father hath given me," says Christ, "shall 
"come unto me," ch. vi. 37. It is one of the 
large group of passages showing the universality 
of Christ's kingdom ; compare ch. xiii. 3, and 
see the connection of the gift of all things to 
Christ and His atoning death — very significant 
I think, and perhaps overlooked by many. Also 
see S. Matt. vi. 27, where, just before the well- 
known appeal " come unto me," Jesus has been 
saying that all things were delivered unto Him by 
His Father ; a connection surely suggestive. 
Read, too, in this light, S. Matt, xxviii. 18, and 
note the connection between all power claimed 
by Christ, and His claim to bring all nations 
to discipleship. So too Heb. ii. 8-9, in this last 
passage again the connection between the gift 
of all things to Jesus Christ, and His atone- 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 139 



ment is very marked — His tasting death for 
every man. The Divine Son is set over all 
things; as He creates all things (actually) so He 
redeems and restores all things (actually, not 
potentially) ; His relation is to all, not a part. 
God has given to Him all things; and all things 
given to Him shall come to Him. 

"The Christ, the Saviour of the world. 

S. John iv. 42. 

The same truth — the world saved. In saying 
God is the creator of the world, an actual creation 
is meant ; so in saying Christ is the Saviour of 
the world, not anything less than an actual 
salvation is meant ; a point I must be forgiven 
for pressing, so true is it and so generally for- 
gotten. 

" Gather up the fragments that remain, that 

NOTHING BE LOST." S. John vi. 12. 

In passing we may note this passage, for 
Christ's hints go very far, and are full of mean- 
ing. What is the larger hope but this, that of 
all that the Father hath given Him He will lose 
nothing, but will gather up every fragment ? 

" HE WHICH * GIVETH LIFE UNTO THE WORLD." 

S. John vi. 33 

Here we are told that life is given, not offered 
merely to the world. The world (Kosmos) is in 
Scripture the ungodly mass, the outer circle. It 
is contrasted with the inner circle of the faithful, 
the elect. But this world is over and over again 



140 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



claimed by Christ. He saves it ; He gives life 
to it ; He gives light to it. Remember to 
" offer " is not the same as to "give." 

" All that the Father giveth Me shall uome 
to Me * And this is the Father's will that 

OF ALL WHICH He HATH GIVEN Me I SHOULD LOSE 

nothing." S. John vi. 3<-9. 

This is very explicit ; we have seen that God 
the Father has given to Christ, not some things, 
but all things; and here we have the word and 
promise of Jesus Christ that all that has been 
given to Him shall come to Him, and that nothing 
shall be lost (ch. vi. 12). What further is needed 
to prove from Scripture a universal salvation ? 
What more could God possibly say ? 



" My flesh which I will give for the life of the 
world." S. John vi. 51. 

Again, it is the world for whose life Christ is 
to give His flesh. Can He give in vain ? His 
gifts are "without repentance," i.e., must be 
effectual. To say that His w r ord can return to 
Him having failed, or His gifts not take effect, is 
to contradict Holy Scripture. 

"Then spake Jesus * I am the light of the 
world." S. John viii. 12. 

Here too the icorld, the ungodly world, is that 
of which Christ is the Li^ht as well as the Life. 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 141 



"I AM THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD." — S. John ix. 5. 

The same idea over and over again ; not the 
elect merely, but the world , enlightened ; 
quickened ; saved. 

" AND I, IF I BE LIFTED UP FROM THE EARTH WILL 

draw all men unto Me." & John xii. 32. 
I think the plainest comment the best here. 
A partial drawing, i.e., a partial salvation 
makes His words untrue. One reads the com- 
ments of good men on this passage, with a feeling 
akin to despair, as they attempt to make Jesus 
Christ say that which He did not say, and not 
say that which He did say. What He does say 
is exactly given in the following lines : — 

So shall I lift up in my pierced hands * 
Beyond the reach of grief and guilt * * 
The whole creation. — E. B. Browning. 

"For I came not to judge the world, but to 
save the world.'' S. John xii. 47. 

This is as distinct as possible; its force can 
only be evaded by asserting that Christ will fail 
to accomplish that very thing which He came to 
do: and this assertion must be made in the teeth 
of those repeated and explicit passages which 
declare the completeness of His triumph. 

" And He is the propitiation for our sins : 
and not for ours only, but also for the sins 

OF THE WHOLE WORLD." 1 John \\. 2. 

Notice here the world contrasted with the true 
disciples; and yet the propitiation is not to be 



142 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



confined to the few, it is for all. S. John's 
anxiety is to assert this for all. Here, as so often, 
the narrower and wider purposes of salvation are 
both mentioned: the narrower not excluding, 
as in the popular view, but including and 
implying the wider ; a truth of the deepest 
importance. 

" The Son of God was manifested that He might 
DESTROY THE WORKS OF the Devil." — 1 John iii. 8. 

Who can read with impartial mind this explicit 
statement, and doubt its meaning ? The very 
purpose of the manifestation of God's Son is the 
sweeping away of Satan's works. How then can 
this possibly be true, while pain and sin and Hell 
endure for ever and ever ? ~No ideas can be more 
exactly opposed than the permanence of evil, and 
yet the destruction of the works of the Devil. 
Is sin the Devil's work? Is all that sin involves 
the work of the Devil? Yes, or 'No? You 
cannot answer in the negative. But if the 
affirmative be true, then all is to be swept away; 
Hell and sin and sorrow. 

"The Father sent the Son to be the Saviour 
of the world." 1 John iv. 14. 

Does it not savour of mockery to say that the 
Father sent the Son to destroy evil and to save 
the world, and yet that neither shall evil be 
destroyed or the world saved ! And remember, 
I am only pleading for Christ's doing the very 
thing He has come to do, and promised to do. 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 143 



"I HAVE THE KEYS OF HELL AND DEATH." 

Rev. i. 18. 

Significant surely! Doubly significant when 
we remember that Chkist had just used these keys 
to open the prison doors. — see p. 80-1, and 
note on \ Peter iii. 19. How, if so, can death (the 
second or any death) sever from Jesus Christ 
( who holds the keys), from His power to save? 

" And every creature which is in Heaven, and 
on the earth, and under the earth, and 
such as are in the sea, and all that are 
in them, heard i saying unto hlm that 
sittith on the throne, and unto the lamb, 

BLESSINGS, ETC." RpV.Y. 13. 

How comprehensive this picture ! Its words 
embrace every created thing — on the earth, and 
under the earth, and in the sea. All are repre- 
sented as swelling the chorus of praise to God, 
and to the Lamb. Yes, to such an end we trust 
and hope that all creation is indeed coming, 
because we trust in the living God, who is the 
Saviour of all men; and because we believe His 
own words, that promise that all things shall be 
made new. How else could all things join in 
this glorious chorus ? 

"Death and Hell were cast into the lake of 
fire." Rev. xx. 14. 

" The sense of the whole seems to be that at 
" the final|Consummation of all things, all evil, 
" physical and moral, will be abolished". — Bishop 
Warburton. 



144 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



"Behold I make all things new." 

Revelations xxi. 5. 

This is the same glorious hope, not for some, but 
for all; no less than all things are to be made new. 
Here again we have a universal restoration 
distinctly promised — the salvation of all. 

"And the leaves of the tree were for the 
healing of the nations. And there shall 
be no more curse." Revelations xxii. 2-3. 

Here is a striking hint — after the manner of 
Holy Scripture — as to a future work of restoration; 
a hint that the nations are one day to be healed ; 
that in another age there shall be ministries of 
salvation; for all this is subsequent to the passing 
away of the present earth, and the present 
Heaven (ch. xxi. 1). And as a result of this 
healing, there shall be no more curse — no pain 
— no tears — and no endless Hell therefore, but 
all things made new. 

"I will pour out of my spirit upon all flesh." 

Acts ii. 17. 

This; and no less, is over and over again 
declared to be the scope and extent of Christ's 
Redemption. Compare these words too with the 
passages following, in one and all of which S. 
Peter emphatically states the universality of 
Christ's work of salvation; it is to tarn " every 
"one of them from his iniquities ;" nay, it is to 
culminate in a time of renewal of all things, as 
our next citation shall shew. 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 145 



"The times of restitution of all things." 

Acts iii. 21. 

All things are to be restored ; and this is said to 
be the meaning of the work of Christ, the meaning 
of the promise to Abraham, of the Jewish 
covenant (v. 25, and c. ii. 17), the meaning of the 
outpoured spirit. This God hath spoken by all 
" the Prophets since the world began." I repeat, 
either these words of the Apostle are untrue, or 
there shall one day be a universal restoration — 
all things made new — all men saved. 

" And have hope that there shall be a resur- 
rection * BOTH OF THE JUST AND THE UNJUST." 

Acts xxiv. 15. 

Note these words — could S. Paul have hoped 
for a resurrection of the unjust if that meant 
hopeless punishment to them? " Who is so great 
" a fool asks a famous Father, as to think so great 
"a boon as the resurrection can be to those 
"that rise an occasion of endless torment?" 
An interesting subject opens out here. So the 
fact of resurrection in S. Gregory's (of Nyssa) 
view involves restoration necessarily because it 
involves incorruption and glory, things proper 
to the Divine nature. Resurrection is, he says, 
" restoration of our nature to itsunfallen state." — - 
De an. et. resur. And to the same effect (as I 
understand his words) writes Theodoret in 
Rom. v. 15-7., vii. 20-3, 2 Cor. ii. 14-6. 



CHAPTER VII. 



" WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES:' 

" With me, this final victory (of good over evil), is not a matter 
" of speculation at all, but of absolute faith ; and to disbelieve it 
' ' would be for me to cease altogether to trust or to worship God. " — 
Bishop Ewing. 

In the last chapter we saw how very numerous 
are the passages which the writings of S. Matthew, 
S. Luke and S. John contain, clearly asserting 
the salvation of all men, or implying it by neces- 
sary inference. We now, in the present chapter, 
proceed to consider the manv and weighty 
declarations, to the same effect, furnished by the 
epistles of S. Paul, S. Peter, and that to the 
Hebreivs. I may here say, that we shall find in 
these books the stream of promise still widening 
— the blessed purpose of Redemption as universal 
in its effects — indicated with a precision of 
language, and a variety of illustration, convincing 
to any fair mind. 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 147 



" The promise that he should be the heir of 
the world * to abraham." 

Here remark how distinct is the assertion — 
that in the promise to Abraham is implied a 
universal blessing. The election by God of the 
Jews really involves the world 1 s salvation; for 
Abraham is 11 heir of the world," i.e., receives as 
his inheritance, the whole world. In a later 
chapter (ch. ix.) I have pursued at more length 
this all important fact, that the essential idea 
involved in the divine election, is by it to convey 
a blessing to all; not to offer, but actually to 
impart this blessing. 

" if through the offence of one many be dead, 
much more the grace of god, * which is by 
one man Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto 
many. Therefore as by the offence of one, 
judgement came upon all men to condemna- 
tion ; EVEN SO BY THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF ONE 
THE FREE GIFT CAME UPON ALL MEN UNTO 

justification of life." Romans v. 15-8. 

I cannot but earnestly commend a study of 
these verses, and with them, of the whole drift 
and argument of the passage. It is, I do not fear 
to assert, absolutely irreconcilable with a partial 
salvation. It contains a statement as explicit as 
words can convey it, of this great truth — God's 
remedy is stronger than sin. Wherever, upon 
whomsoever sin has lighted, there shall God's 
grace, through Jesus Christ, come to heal. In 
the very same sense as " the many " (all men) 



148 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



were made sinners, so the " many " shall have 
righteousness — not merely offered them — but be 
made righteous. Less than this cannot satisfy 
the original text, about the meaning of which 
there is no question at all. Will the advocates 
of the popular creed explain how the grace of 
God (v. 15) can be mightier, in fact, than the 
Fall, if there be a Hell ringing to all eternity 
with the groans of the lost? Will they explain 
how grace can much more abound than the offence 
— if there be a place of endless torture to punish 
the offence — if the offence be never taken away ? 

"For the earnest expectation of the creature 
waiteth for the manifestation of the sons 
of God. Because the creature itself also 
shall be delivered from the bondage of 
corruption into the glorious liberty of the 
children of god. for we know that the 
whole creation groaneth and travaileth 
in pain together until now. * waiting for 
the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our 
BODY." Romans viii. 19-21-22-23. 

Here is a glorious passage in which the larger 
hope is not dimly, but explicitly taught — taught 
with absolute clearness. As to the details of S. 
Paul's meaning, men may fairly differ; but his 
central thought is clear. All created things 
have been subjected to vanity — to pain and 
suffering. Yet these are but the travail pains of 
a new birth; all that suffers shall be delivered 
from the bondage of corruption. Note how 
here (alone in the New Testament I think) are 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 149 



the sufferings of the whole creation alluded to, 
and how emphatic is the assertion that every 
created thing * — pasa he ktisis — is awaiting 
Redemption; and this reaches them by the mani- 
festation of the Sons of God, ' the first fruits.' 

"For if the casting away of them be the 
reconciling of the world, what shall the 
receiving of them be, but life from the 
dead? for if the first fruit be holy, the 
lump is also holy." Romans xi. 15-16. 

Here are neglected truths plainly stated. The 
calling of the Jews is linked in God's plan with 
the world's salvation (v. 12). They are His 
people, in the truly divine sense, that by them 
the world's salvation may be worked out. They, 
as ' first fruits,' represent and pledge the world — 
this is the true election and this only — and 
Jesus Christ has, by His Cross, made of Jew 
and Gentile " one new man " — suggestive words 
(Eph. ii. 15). Abraham is thus made, in 
Scripture phrase, the " heir of the world." But 
it is precisely this breadth of the divine purpose 
that the Bible is so anxious to enforce, and the 
popular creed so anxious to deny. 

" And so all Israel shall be saved." — Rom. xi. 26. 
Not one soul therefore lost finally; not a 
Dives — not a Judas — if all shall be saved. And 



* "Thus, then," says S.Jerome, " the whole number of created 
' ' beings (universa creatura ) unites its groans with ours that it may 
" be set free from the bondage of vanity." — In Eph. ii. 14. 



150 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



Israel is but a type of all mankind. Israel is the 
election — but God's election means, that in 
Israel " all the families of the earth shall be 
"blessed." (a). God's rejection of Israel is 
apparent only, for His calling is indefeasible, and 
therefore (b) all Israel shall be saved — without 
exception. (c). Israel, i.e., the elect, is so 
closely linked with the world, that their very 
rejection means the world's salvation — in God's 
mysterious plan. (d). So close is this tie 
between the elect and the world, that a further 
promise follows, that Israel's restoration shall be 
to the world "life from the dead" — v. 15 — in 
itself a very suggestive phrase as to God's way 
of giving life — see ch. ix., on Death. 

"For the gifts and calling of God are with- 
out repentance." Romans xi. 29. 

That is, what God gives, He gives effectually. 
When He calls, men must hear — a fact of the 
deepest significance, nay, decisive of this ques- 
tion. Let me ask the advocates of the popular 
creed, how, if God's call to mankind must be 
obeyed, sooner or later, there is any room for 
endless disobedience in Hell ? 

" God hath concluded them all in unbelief, 
that He might have mercy upon all." 

Romans xi. 32. 

Words that surely need no comment. The 
original is the widest possible ; it is the whole 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 151 



mass of men to whom S. Paul refers. The 
whole is shut up unto unbelief in order that the 
whole may find mercy. 

" as i live, saith the lord, every knee shall 
bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to 
God. So then every one of us shall give 
account of himself to god." — rom. xiv. 1 1-12. 

S. Paul here quotes the great passage of 
Isaiah (see p. 127), in which salvation is promised 
to the entire human race. From the whole con- 
text it is clear that Christ's empire over all is 
absolute; extends to the dead; implies salvation; 
and this salvation is linked with his (future) 
judgement. — See on judgement, ch. ix. 

"As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall 

ALL BE MADE ALIVE. 1 Cor. XV. 22. 

As Adam actually brought death, spiritually, 
to all, so the second Adam actually brings life, 
spiritually, to all. No offer of life can for a 
moment satisfy the plain language of the text. 
Nothing less than life really — spiritually im- 
parted to all by the second Adam- -can fairly 
express S. Paul's meaning. In plain words. S. 
Paul is here distinctly teaching the salvation of 
all men. 

"For He must reign, till He hath put all 
enemies under hls feet. * * that god may 

BE ALL IN ALL." 1 Got. XV. 25-28. 

There is here, at the End, no place for sin — no 
trace of evil— no Hell — for is not God All and in 



152 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



All? S. Paul's meaning, says the famous S. 
Gregory, of Nyssa, is," that the nature of evil shall 
" be wholly exterminated, and divine goodness 
" embrace within itself every rational creature 
" * * everything must be subject to Him who 
" rules over all. Now, subjection to God is per- 
fect and absolute alienation from evil." S. 
Paul, in fact, defines here this subjection of all 
things to Christ as being perfect harmony with 
His will, for it is the same subjection by which 
Christ is subject to the Father. — see, too, note 
on Phil. iii. 10. "In this text" says S. Gregory, 
in another place, "the Scripture seems to declare 
"the perfect and absolute destruction of sin and 
" evil." — De an. et. resur. 

" 0 DEATH WHERE IS THY STING ? O GRAVE WHERE 
IS THY VICTORY ?" 1 Cor. XV. 55. 

Fitly do these words close this chapter, with a 
prospect of universal victory over every opposing 
power. I ask my readers quietly to think over 
the whole drift of this chapter ; to mark the 
Apostle's increasing rapture, as his argument 
expands, and as the prospect opens before him of 
a universe yet to be, from which every form of 
evil is banished. Let them consider these two 
thoughts, ever present to the Apostle's mind 
here: the oneness of mankind in Christ, and the 
certainty and universality of Christ's victory; let 
them, with S. Paul, look on in thought to the 
End, when God shall be All in All; then let 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 153 



them say if the salvation of all men be not 
taught in Holy Scripture. 

" GrOD WAS IN CHRIST RECONCILING THE WORLD UNTO 

Himself." 2 Cor. v. 19. 

Here is once more stated the extent of Christ's 
work, it is the world reconciled, and no less than 
the world. The question is, by what right do we 
limit its efficacy, when God assures us that His 
gifts and calling are without repentance, and 
His purpose immutable? Is God in earnest? 
does He mean what He says ? I speak with 
reverence. This is a question that must surely 
often rise unbidden, as we read these statements 
of the Bible, and compare them with the popular 
creed, which so often turns "all" into "some," 
when salvation is promised to "all," and turns 
the "world," when that is said to be saved, into 
a mere fraction of men. 

" In Thee shall all nations be blessed." 

Gal iii. 8. 

The force of texts like this lies in the fact, that 
they shew the true meaning of God's election, 
and that they are links in that great chain of 
promise — of blessing to all men — which S. 
Peter assures us God spake by the mouth of all 
His Holy Prophets, and which he declares to 
mean the restitution of all things. 



154 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



"That * He might gather together in one 
all things in christ, both which are in 
Heaven and which are on earth." Eph. i. 10. 

Could the writer of these words have possibly 
believed in a Hell swallowing up its myriads of 
victims? What can convey the idea of a future, 
in which all things — all the universe — shall be 
brought to Christ, if this passage does not 
convey it? But if the universe and its contents, 
are summed up in Christ, where is any possi- 
bility of an endless Hell ? 

"God Hath put all things under his feet." 

Eph. i. 22. 

Yes, to Jesus Christ all are to be brought — 
all things are to bend to Him. Now can you — 
forgive my repeating the question — find place for 
Hell torments in a universe in which everything 
is to be summed up in Jesus Christ; in which 
every knee is to bend to Him, and to Him every 
tongue to confess? 

" The church which is His body, the fulness 
of Him which filleth all in all" Eph. i. 23. 

"The Church," says S. Jerome, "may be 
" understood as that composed not only of human 
" beings, but of angels, and of the whole body of 
" rational creatures," — suggestive words. 

" That in the ages to come He might shew the 
exceeding riches of His grace." — Eph. ii. 7. 

On this S. Jerome says — " The extent of this 
" grace is shewn by the fact that in the ages to 
" come that grace will be extended to the whole 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 155 



"number of rational creatures," including 
evil spirits, as he goes on to state expressly. — 
See his words quoted in ch. iv. 

" What is the fellowship of the mystery, &c." 

Eph. iii. 9-10. 

" The mystery of His will," says Ambrosiaster, 
(probably Hilary the Deacon — 4th cent.), "is 
" that He should shew mercy to all who had 
u strayed, whether fallen angels or men." 

" He ascended up far above all heavens that He 

MIGHT FILL ALL THINGS." Eph. iv. 10. 

But if Christ is to fill all things — the universe 
— how can evil subsist eternally? 
"From whom the whole body fitly joined 

TOGETHER * MAKETH INCREASE." Eph. iv. 16. 

Very striking is S. Jerome's comment here. 
u The whole number of rational beings," he says, 
" may be compared to a single body, now torn 
" asunder by sin, but in the restoration of all 
u things, Christ, like some wonder-working 
" physician, shall come and restore to its proper 
u place every part — the fallen angels to their 
" former station, and man to Paradise once 
more." 

" Who is the first-born of every creature : and 
by Him to reconcile all things unto Him- 
self ; BY HIM, I SAY, WHETHER THEY BE THINGS | 
IN EARTH, OR THINGS IN HEAVEN." Col. i. 15-1 9-20. 

I ask you carefully to read and consider this 

f Observe here as elsewhere, S. Paul seems to provide against a 
possible or a probable doubt as to the extent of this reconciliation 
by repeating his assertion and emphasising it. 



156 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



passage, and say, if it does not contain a clear 
statement that Christ is the " first-born " of all 
creation, and thus sums up in Himself all, not 
the elect or holy, but mankind (see pages 69-71) 
whose solidarity is thus affirmed? I ask you 
further, in all calmness, to weigh the words in 
which S. Paul traces this prerogative of Jesus 
Christ through creation up to redemption; to 
take in their simple grandeur the words, which 
tell how He on and by the Cross reconciled all 
things unto Himself, whether on earth or in 
Heaven. I ask you finally what these words can 
mean if they do not mean a certain restitution 
of all things? 

" That at the name of Jesus every knee should 
bow, of things in heaven, and things in 
earth, and things under the earth ; and 
that every tongue should confess that 
Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God 
the Father." Phvp. ii. 10.-11. 

This is S. Paul's statement of the great vision 
of the Apocalypse (Rev. v. 13), in which every 
created thing in Heaven and on earth and under 
the earth unites to sing — blessing, etc., to God 
most high. Could a picture more universal be 
painted — every knee, in heaven, on earth, under 
the earth? " So it is," says S. Jerome, refer- 
ring to this passage, " that the Cross of the Lord 
" has helped not man alone, but angels, and that 
" every created being has been cleansed by the 
" blood of its Lord: 1 — In Eph. ii. 14. 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 157 



"Able even to subdue all things unto Himself." 

Phil. iii. 21, 

In what sense this subjugation of all things to 
Christ is to be understood, is clear from the 
context, " who shall fashion anew the body of 
" our humiliation, that it may be conformed to 
" the body of His glory, according to the working 
" whereby He is able even to subdue all things 
" unto Himself." Note the significance of this. 
No one can doubt that Christ is destined to 
subdue all things, but this passage shews 
decisively 'that Christ's subduing all things (in the 
Scriptural sense) is making them like unto Him- 
self. —See note on 1 Cor. xv. 25. " In saying that 
" every knee, &c, &c, shall bend to Jesus, the 
44 Apostle clearly teaches the harmony of the 
" entire universe with what is good." — S. 
Gregory, De an. et. res. 

" God our Saviour, who will have all men to 

BE SAVED, FOR THERE IS ONE GOD." 1 Tim. ii. 3-4. 

" None can hinder His doing as He wills * * 
" Now His will is that all should be saved. 
&<* * g ut because none is saved against his 
" own will God wills us to have a good will that 
" so His counsel may take effect." — In Eph. i. 2. 
In these few words S. Jerome states concisely 
the whole case for the universalists. Further, 
S. Paul rests on the essential unity of God — the 
One God — can have but one eternal irresistible 
purpose. "God is One, the One that is All, 



158 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



" that binds up all in one, and one in all, and 
"makes all one." — J. White, Restoration of all 
things. 

" God the Saviour of all men, specially of 

THOSE THAT BELIEVE." 1 Tim. IV. 10. 

Any possible obscurity in this passage becomes 
clear the moment we reflect on God's plan by 
which the elect — those who believe — are first 
saved, and then become the means, here or in 
the ages yet to come, of saving all men; as will 
be more fully explained in a subsequent chapter 
(ch. ix.). Note, the clear statement that God 
is (actually) the Saviour of all men. In saying 
God is the Creator of all men, no one doubts that 
a universal creation is meant; so in saving God 
is the Saviour of all men, a universal salvation 
is assuredly meant. 

"Our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished 
death." 2 Tim. i. 1 0. 

Death is abolished, and with death that which 
it in Scripture implies, sin and evil. For death 
abolished and Hell maintained for ever are plain 
contradictions, Here we may very well ask 
those who maintain the doctrine of conditional 
immortality, how death can be abolished and yet 
swallow up finally all sinners in a sentence of 
annihilation — as they teach — (a plain absurdity). 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 159 



"For the grace of God hath appeared bringing 

SALVATION TO ALL MEN." TitllS ii. 11. 

Yes, to all men, salvation: this is precisely 
the larger hope. But how is " salvation brought 
"'to all men" consistent with the damnation of 
myriads of men — nay, of any man ? 

" He also went and preached unto the spirits 
in prison." 1 Peter iii. 19. 

If we believe these words of the Apostle, they 
amount to a complete overthrow of the popular 
view of the state of the sinful dead ; for plainly 
these words do shew a process of redemption as 
going on after death, which the popular creed 
flatly denies. Remark, too, who they were to 
whom Christ preached: they were not those 
who previously had no chance of salvation, but 
they seem to have been those who had sinned 
against the greatest light known in their day: — 
they were those who had been disobedient in the 
days of Noah. Yet it was to these men that 
Jesus went with His offer of salvation, after 
their earthly probation was over, after they had 
been shut up 'in prison." 1 

"The gospel was preached even to the dead, 
that they might be judged * but live in 
the spirit." 1 Peter iv. 6. 

Words, these, surely full of hope! Notice 
again here the connection between judgement 
and salvation (see v. 5.). S. Peter in this 



160 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



reference to the preaching of the gospel to the 
dead, must have — as just remarked — intended a 
lesson to the Christians of his day, and of our 
day; must have meant a hint as to what God's 
plan of mercy in the full extent is, else the 
reference could hardly have been made. Here 
we see sinners dead and judged and yet, in very 
deed, evangelised — saved — alive to God in the 
spirit. 

"The Lord is * not willing that any should 
perish, but that all should come to repent- 
ANCE." 2 Peter iii. 9. 

If then any do perish, God's will and design 
must have been successfully resisted; a thing 
absurd, for both are immutable. 

" Thou hast put all things in subjection under 
His feet, etc." Heb. ii. 8-9 

This is to be compared with that very large 
class of passages which speak so clearly of 
Christ's kingdom as destined to extend over 
all things, e.g. Eph. iv. 10; i. 10; Phil. iii. 
9-11 ; Rev. v. 13. I have already clearly shewn 
that subjection to Christ means perfect harmony 
and peace. — See note on Phil iii. 21. 

"That through death He might destroy the 
Devil." Heb. ii. 14. 

But the destruction of the Devil is inconsistent 
with the continuance of death and evil (if words 
are to have any meaning at all.) 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 161 



"The immutability of His counsel." Heb. vi. 17. 

Yes, on this we build ! Would you know what 
His counsel is ? Turn to 2 Peter iii. 9 : " Not 
" willing that any should perish, but (willing) 
"that all should come to salvation." The word 
translated ' willing,' is the same as the ' counsel ' 
of this passage. And thus, as His counsel is 
immutable — a partial salvation becomes im- 
possible. 

"For this is the covenant that I will make 
with the house of israel * all shall know 
Me, from the least to the greatest." 

Heb. viii. 10-11. 

This is spoken of the New Covenant, and is a 
distinct statement of its true extent. All from 
the least to the greatest, are to know God. Now, 
can a partial salvation really be said to satisfy 
these plain words, on any principle of common 
honesty of interpretation, of common truthfulness? 

" He hath appeared to put away sin by the 
sacrifice of Himself." Heb. ix. 26. 

See how very significant the words are, it is 
the destruction of sin, its annihilation, that is 
said to be the object of the manifestation of 
J esus Christ. But this annihilation of sin and 
evil cannot by any fairness of interpretation take 
place, if Hell and its horrors go on for ever. Sin 
put away — all sin abolished — is the promise of 
the text, and the hope of the universal] st. 



162 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



"Jesus Christ the same yesterday to-day and 
unto the ages." Heb. xiii. 8. 

The same throughout ' the ages ;' words little 
heeded, I fear; and yet which contain indeed the 
very essence of the Gospel — the very sum and 
substance of the true hope for our race. I rejoice 
to close with such a passage this long list of 
texts from Holy Scripture, which one and all 
testify to the assured hope there is in Jesus 
Christ of the salvation of every child of Adam. 
For what is it these words teach ? not that 
Christ is now a Saviour, and will in future be 
merely a judge to condemn; but that what Hp: 
was on earth that is He now ; and that He will 
be through ' the ages ' (judging ever, but only a 
judge that He may by it be a Saviour). " These 
" words imply that through the ages a Saviour is 
" needed, and will be found as much as to-day 
" and yesterday." 

Indeed, I might almost say, that this passage 
holds the key to the whole mystery of future 
punishment, and future salvation. It bids us 
look beyond the present life, to a series of ages 
yet to come, and there see Jesus Christ still 
working to save ; doubtless by penalty, by sharp 
discipline, by fiery trial in the case of hardened 
sinners, but still through ' the a^es ' the same 
Jesus, i.e., Saviour, and destined to continue His 
work of salvation till the last wanderer shall have 
been found. 

And here let me say that this series of passages 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 163 



of Holy Scripture, lengthened as it is, might 
very easily have been increased. So far from 
produckig every possible passage that teaches the 
larger hope, I might have easily cited other texts 
that teach, or imply the same. In proof of this, 
let me take but two clauses of the Lord's Prayer; 
" Our Father,' ' these two words really involve 
the whole question — they convey all I teach — 
are the charter of our humanity — they form a tie 
never to be broken between man and God, " Thy 
"will be done on earth as in Heaven." But 
how is His will done in Heaven? It is 
universally done. Shall it not then be universally 
done on earth too? Does Jesus Christ put into 
our mouths a petition which He does not design 
to fulfil, nay, to fulfil in larger measure than we 
can hope ? Would you have further proof how 
true it is that I have not exhausted all the 
passages of the New Testament that teach the 
larger hope? — although I prefer to appeal on this 
point (see p. 4) to the Divine justice — I have but 
to quote the memorable words, which may fitly 
wind up the series, " God is love." To this 
point all His attributes converge. Love is the 
name of that character, which united they form 
(love eternal, infinite, divine). Can this love, by 
any possibility, consign to hopeless, endless, 
agony, its own children? Could this love, by 
any possibility, have called into being any one 
creature knowing that unending torture would 
be its fate ? Can infinite love ever cease to love 



164 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



— can love essential ever fail ? — let the Apostle 
reply, " Love never faileth." * 

A few words of earnest caution must be added 
here. I trust it has been made plain in these 
pages, that in teaching universal salvation, I 
have not for a moment advocated the salvation 
of sinners while they continue such. Far other 
is the view maintained here; it is the certain 
punishment of sin I teach — God's judgement 
upon all sin (a judgement awful it may well be 
in its duration and its nature for the hardened 
offender), but in all cases directed by love and 
justice to the final extirpation of sin. Nay, I 
have opposed the popular creed on this very 
ground (pp. 4 and 44 ) that it in fact teaches men 
to make light of sin, and that in two ways: first, 
because it sets forth a scheme of retribution so 
unjust as to make men believe its penalties will 
never be inflicted ; and next because it in fact 
asserts that God either will not or cannot over- 
come and destroy evil and sin, but will bear with 
them to all eternity; will permit them to continue 



* In the above brief notes I have not attempted an exhaustive 
comment. It has been my aim to point out the plain natural meaning 
of the passages cited, in their bearing on the future destiny of man, 
and to present this meaning in the most simple and straightforward 
way. Specially have I urged the imperative necessity of truthful- 
ness, of assuming that what the sacred writers say, that they mean, 
in the ordinary acceptation of their words —that in saying, e.g., 'I 
' make all things new, ' Christ really meant all things and not some 
things; that in saying ' God is the Saviour of all men,' the Apostle 
meant that God really does save all men. 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 165 



defiling and darkening his universe for ever and 
ever. Let me then say with all due emphasis, 
that not one word has been written in these 
pages tending to represent God as a merely good 
natured Being — all-indulgent to the sinner — 
who regards as a light matter the violation of 
His holy law. Such shallow theology, G-od 
forbid that I should teach. It is, I fully admit, 
in the light of Calvary that we are bound to see 
the true guilt of sin. Bat let us beware, lest, as 
we stand in thought at the foot of the Cross, we 
dishonour the Atonement by limiting its power 
to save — by teaching men that it does in fact fail 
to save countless myriads — that Christ is after 
all not the victor but the vanquished ! Nay, let 
us beware lest while in words professing to honour 
Christ, we, in fact, make Him a liar; for He has 
never said, ' I, if I be lifted up, will draw some 
' men,' or even ' most men,' but 4 I will draw all 
4 men unto me.' 



CHAPTER VIII. 
" WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 77 

" The word Hell, the sacred writers never use in the sense which 
" is generally given to it." — Dr. Ernest Petavel. — The struggle for 
Eternal Life. 

In the preceding chapters we have examined 
the various passages of the New Testament which 
teach, or imply clearly, the larger hope for all 
men. In the present chapter I purpose consider- 
ing the chief texts alleged in favour of the 
received doctrine; and I hope to shew, that while 
undoubtedly the penalties threatened against 
sinners are sharp and terrible, still they are not 
endless. I believe that no one passage can be 
found any where in the Bible that so teaches, 
when fairly translated and understood. I must 
ask you, before we proceed to our examination of 
these passages, to bear in mind the following con- 
siderations: — 

1. A fact of the deepest significance is this: 
that although many terms and phrases existed, 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 167 



by which the idea of unendingness might have 
been conveyed, yet none of these is applied by 
our Lord and His Apostles to the future punish- 
ment of the impenitent. 

2. Thus aiidios or ateleutetos, a stronger word, 
are never used of future punishment in the ISFew 
Testament. Nor is it anywhere said to be aneu 
telous " without end " nor do we read that it shall 
go on pantote, or eis to dienekes " for ever." 

3. Is it, I ask, conceivable, that a sentence, so 
awful as to be absolutely beyond all human 
thought, should be pronounced against myriads 
upon myriads of hapless creatures in language 
admittedly capable of a very different meaning 
and habitually so used in the New Testament ? 

4. Again, while the texts already quoted in 
favour of the salvation of all men, use language 
clear and explicit, and are a fair rendering of the 
original in all cases, it is not so in the case of the 
passages usually alleged to prove endless torment. 
In all cases where they seem to the English 
reader so to teach, they are either mistranslated 
or misinterpreted, or both. 

5. As instances of wholly incorrect rendering 
in our version, let me take the words ' Hell ' and 
'damnation,' * (the terms 'everlasting,' 'eternal,' 



* I may again remind my readers how inaccurate is the assumption 
all but universally made, that these terms are in the Bible. They 
are merely in a certain human and fallible translation of the Bible, a 
totally different thing. 



168 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



and 'for ever and ever,' also complete mistransla- 
tions, will be in the next chapter, fully discussed). 
' Hell ' is, really, in the New Testament, the render- 
ing of three widely differing Greek words, viz., 
" Gehenna;" " Hades," and " Tartarus," a fact in 
itself a sufficient comment on the accuracy of our 
translation. " Gehenna " occurs eleven times in 
the New Testament as used by our Lord, 
and once by S. James. In the original Greek it 
is taken almost unchanged from the Hebrew 
( Ge-hinnom, i.e., valley of Hinnom), an example 
which our translators surely ought to have 
followed, and rendered Gehenna, as it is, by 
Gehenna. This valley lay outside Jerusalem: 
once a pleasant vale and later a scene of Moloch 
worship, it had sunk into a common cesspit at 
last. Into it were flung offal, the carcasses of 
animals, and it would seem, of criminals, and in 
it were kept fires ever burning (for purification 
be it remembered), while the worms were for 
ever preying on the decaying matter. The so- 
called undying worm and flame, of which so 
much has been made (i.) were purely temporal 
and finite (ii.), preyed only on the dead body 
(hi.) and were one and all purifactory : three 
particulars essential to the due understanding 
of the passages on which the dogma of endless 
torments has been so unfairly based. Hades 
is a classical term, denoting merely the state or 
place of disembodied spirits after death. Our 
Revisers have, by a tardy justice, struck Hell 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 169 



as its translation, out of their version. It 
occurs in the Gospels and Epistles five times, 
twice in the Acts, and four times in the 
Revelations. Its true meaning is hardly now a 
subject of dispute by any one : it denotes that 
intermediate state or place, which succeeds 
death; a state which in our recoil from Romish 
error, we have almost ceased to recognise at all. 
Tartarus occurs once only (in the verbal form) 
in the New Testament, in 2 Peter ii. 4. It also 
is a classical term, used there most often, 
although not always, for the place of future 
punishment of the wicked. Here S. Peter 
applies it not to human beings, but to the lost 
angels; and in their case it denotes no final place 
of torment, but a prison in which they are kept 
awaiting their final judgement, hence to render it 
by the term Hell is simply preposterous. 
' Damnation,' ' damned,' both of these terms 
represent merely two Greek words (and their 
derivatives), krino and katakrino, i.e., to judge 
and to condemn. Our Revisers have felt how 
unwarrantable the former translation was, for 
which there is indeed this excuse, that pro- 
bably, when the authorised version was made, 
the meaning of the word ' damn ' was far milder 
than it has since become (as w r as certainly the 
case with the term 'Hell'). To import into 
these words the idea of endless torment is to 
err against all fairness and all reason ; for they 
simply mean to 'judge,' and at most, to 'con- 



170 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



4 demn.' Of endless condemnation there is no 
thought in the original, in any case where these 
words occur. * 

Most significant is it that when we look to the 
original of the New Testament, the whole idea of 
endless punishment, that we associate with these 
words, ' Hell,' and 1 damnation,' wholly disap- 
pears. The horrors of unending agony, which 
these terms conjure up for so many, vanish 
when we come to know that by ' damnation ' is 
simply meant 'judgement,' or at most 4 condem- 
' nation,' as our Revisers now very fully admit 
in their version of the New Testament ; and by 
'Hell' is only meant, either the place of disem- 
bodied souls — Hades — (as our Revisers now 
render it) — or the Jewish Gehenna (see margin 
of Revised Version), a place of temporary punish- 
ment, where the worms fed continually, it is true, 
and the tire for ever burned; but in both cases 
purifying, and causing no pain (for the bodies 
were those of the dead) ; and where both ' undying' 
worm, and ' unquenchable' fire, have long since, 
in their literal sense, passed away. True it is, 
most true, that while no unending torment is 
threatened by our Lord, yet His words do 
convey most weighty and most solemn warning 



* In one passage, 2 Peter ii. 3, the word ' damnation ' represents 
a different Greek word, 'apoleia,' and is rightly rendered by our 
Revisers as ' destruction, ' in that place. 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 171 



to the sinner — warning that I am persuaded 
gains in real weight and solemnity when its 
true import is discerned — because the conscience 
recognises its justice. Lastly, let me repeat 
that I accept heartily and emphatically 
— in their true natural sense — every warning, 
however terrible, and every penalty threatened 
against sinners in God's word ; but that true 
natural sense is not, as I hope to shew, in any 
one case that of endless torment. My quarrel 
with the advocates of the popular view (as far as 
the Scripture is concerned) is that, while assign- 
ing to one class of texts a meaning, which they 
cannot fairly bear, they at the same time wholly 
put out of view — blot out from the Bible in fact 
— a very large and weighty class of passages, 
furnished by the New Testament, in favour of 
universal salvation. Thus, as so often happens 
when men persist in seeing only one side, they 
fail to apprehend the true meaning, even of that 
one side, which they present to us as though it 
were the whole. 

" He shall burn up the chaff with unquench- 
able fire." 8. Matthew iii. 12, Luke in., 17. 

(a) The word 'unquenchable' is no doubt an 
unfair rendering of the original — which certainly 
does not convey the idea of a fire that never can 
be quenched — but of a fire which cannot be 
checked or quenched in doing its work. In 
Homer, where this Avord first occurs, it is " applied 



112 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



" to the fire which for a few hours rages in the 
u Grecian fleet — to the gleam of Hector's helmet 
" — to glory — to laughter and to shouting." In 
the same popular way, without a thought of 
endless duration, it is found in ecclesiastical 
writers. Josephus calls the fire on the 
temple altar ' always unquenchable ' at a time 
when both temple and altar were destroyed. 
a Eusebius says of two martyrs, that they were 
" consumed with 4 unquenchable 7 fire ; and again 
" of other two, that they were destroyed by 4 un- 
" quenchable ' fire." — Mercy and Judgement, 
p. 406. (V) If the context be examined, it 
becomes clear that the reference is to a present, 
and then impending judgement — a present 
work of Christ, and not a future punishment, 
(c) The whole figure implies not the torture of 
the wicked in a future life, but the destruction, 
by Christ's fiery baptism, of that chaff which 
surrounds every grain. 

" Whosoever shall say thou fool shall be in 
danger of Hell-fire." S. Matt. v. 22. 

The popular interpretation is not unfounded 
alone, but reduces the words of Christ to an 
absurdity here. " It is incredible that to call a 
" man a fool should be so much a worse crime 
" than to call him Raca, that, whereas for the one 
" offence men are to be brought before a court of 
"justice, for the other they are to be damned to 
"an everlasting torment." Need I say further 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 173 



here that the Hell -tire of this passage is the fire 
of ' Gehenna] the temporary punishment of the 
criminal. 

" Fear Him which is able to destroy both body 
and soul in Hell." — S.Matt. x. 28, S.Luke xii. 13. 

On any possible view these w r ords do not teach 
or imply endless torment ; if they teach an actual 
future punishment it is total destruction, not 
unending pain. But they really point to God's 
power rather than to His intention. They say 
God is able to destroy body and soul, they do 
not say that God will do so. 

" For what is a man profited if he shall gain 
the whole world and lose his own soul." 
(life). S Matt, xvi. 26. 

This certainly shows that a man by persisting 
in sin may lose his soul, a loss greater than that 
of the whole world. But how does this teach 
endless torment, or endless sin, or how does it 
prove anything against a future restitution 
though to a measure of happiness far lower than 
if sin had not been persisted in ? Further, the 
context seems to shew that our Lord is here 
speaking of a coming and of a judgement in the 
life time of those to whom Hp: spoke, v. 27-8, 
and see on ch. xxv. 46 and hi. 12 

" HOW SHALL YE ESCAPE THE DAMNATION OF 11 ELL." 

S. Matt, xxiii. 33. 
Not one syllable is needed by way of com- 
ment here, but to replace a misleading translation 
by the true rendering — " How shall ye escape 



174 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



the " judgement of Gehenna " — -the Jewish 
punishment awarded to criminals. 

" It is profitable for thee that one of thy 
members should perish, and not that thy 

WHOLE BODY SHOULD BE CAST INTO HELL. — Matt. 

v. 29-30, and xviii. 8-9. 

These two passages are so similar that they 
may be considered together, and may be com- 
pared with S. Mark ix. 43-50, where a full 
comment is given. Here it is enough to say that 
the ■ Hell ' of the text is merely ' Gehenna,' and 
the punishment, that temporary one inflicted on 
evil doers. ' Hell -fire ' is the fire of Gehenna, 
already explained, ' Everlasting fire,' of chapter 
xviii. 8, is Ionian fire. 

" And these shall go away into everlasting 
punishment, but the righteous into life 

ETERNAL. S. Matt. XXV. 46. 

This oft quoted text, if fairly translated, 
requires an interpretation quite distinct from that 
of the popular theology, and opposed to it. 

(a) ' Everlasting ' and ' eternal,' merely represent 
the Greek word aionios, and mean of or belong- 
ing to an age — aBonian, see next chapter. 

(b) The word translated punishment is a 
remarkable one, it means, literally, pruning, i.e., 
corrective punishment, and should be so rendered. 

(c) So that which is threatened is the opposite 
of our popular Hell ; it is an Ionian discipline, 
a corrective process, proper to the age — or ages. 
And of this beneficent purpose there is a hint 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



175 



often unnoticed in the term applied to those on 
the left hand, it is properly ' kids ' or ' kidlings,' 
a diminutive, implying a certain affection, 
(d) But it will no doubt be said, that the same 
word is applied to the happiness of the saved 
and to the punishment of the lost, and that if it 
does not mean endless in the latter case then the 
bliss of the redeemed is thus rendered uncertain. 
I reply, even were it so, we are not at liberty to 
mistranslate the original: but further, no greater 
error can be imagined than this assertion. The 
facts are simply these : — In this passage all that 
is asserted is that a certain i asonian ' penalty, 
and a certain 4 aeonian ' reward will respectively 
be the lot of the wicked and of the righteous ; 
so far both the penalty and the reward stand on 
the same footing. But this leaves perfectly open 
the whole question of the precise duration of 
either, so far as the present passage goes. For the 
term geonian is quite indefinite, it does not touch 
the question of the limit of time ; it simply 
imparts that both reward and penalty go on 
to a future age or ages. The question, what will 
happen after this age or ages is not raised in this 
passage, (e) Another important question arises 
here — to what time are we to refer this judgement 
scene. These words close a continuous discourse 
extending over chapters xxiv-v. There is no 
break throughout. And remember the question 
of the disciples, in chapter xxiv. is really not 
about the end of the 4 world/ but of the ' age;' and 



176 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



Christ Himself says, v. 34, All the things He is 
speaking of should be fulfilled before the passing 
away of the then generation. " To judge by a 
" simple straightforward reading of these 
" chapters, the scene of the Son of Man sitting 
upon the throne of His glory, belongs as 
" properly to the time of the destruction of the 
" temple, as the fleeing of those in Judea into 
" the mountains." — Rev. J. L. Da vies. 

k ' It is good for thee to enter into life maimed, 

RATHER THAN HAVING THY TWO HANDS TO GO 
INTO HELL, INTO THE UNQUENCHABLE FIRE. * It 

is good for thee to enter into life halt, 
rather than having thy two feet to be cast 
into Hell. * It is good for thee to enter 
into the kingdom of god with one eye, rather 
than having two eyes to be cast into hell ; 
where their worm dieth not, and the fire is 
not quenched. for every one shall be salted 
with fire." — Rev, Vers. S. Mark ix. 43-50. 

(a) Note, first, that the revised text omits 
v. 44 and 46, which lend in our ordinary version 
so much weight to the threats here uttered, 
(b) Observe next that the whole passage depends 
on the statement of v. 49 — a fact generally over- 
looked — " For every one shall be salted " with 
k 'fire." These words assign the reason for the 
whole preceding clauses, and indeed seem plainly 
enough to shew that the true reference in this 
passage is to some sacrificial or purifying process, 
which every one must undergo ; as in 1 Cor. iii. 
13, " The fire shall try every man's work/' If 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. Ill 



the sacrifice be not made voluntarily — if the eye 
or the foot be not sacrificed — a sharper sacrifice 
— a severer penalty will be demanded, (c) The 
word translated Hell is simply, as already ex- 
plained, the Jewish Grehenna — the valley of 
Hinnom — a place of purely temporary punish- 
ment, (d) The phrase, 44 where their worm 
44 dieth not and the fire is not quenched," is 
quoted from the Old Testament, where it 
occurs in the Septuagint nine times, Lev. vi. 13; 
2 Kings xxii. 17; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 25; Isaiah 
xxxiv. 10; Jer. vii. 20, xvii. 27, xxxi. 12; 
Ex. xx. 47; Isaiah lvi. 24. But in all these 
passages the flame is temporary. The last is 
that specially quoted here and the reference is 
to the worm and to the fire that preyed on the 
dead bodies of malefactors, cast out into 
Gehenna. In the striking metaphor of the East, 
these worms, and this fire are said not to die, and 
not to be quenched; because the fires were kept 
constantly burning to drive away pollution, and 
the worm was always preying on the corpse and 
offal. The phrase, ' into the fire that never shall 
' be quenched,' it will be seen disappears in the 
Revised Version. The original word is the same 
already commented on in the note on S. Matthew 
iii. 12, translated 4 unquenchable,' and proved to 
have been frequently applied to a fire, not merely 
temporary but often very brief in its duration, 
(e) I have already admitted fully the solemn 
nature of our Lord's threats, in the case of the 



178 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



ungodly; and I desire as fully to recognise that 
while Gehenna literally and primarily means the 
valley of that name, and its temporary penalties, 
there is very often, doubtless, also in our Lord's 
words, an allusion to that dark province of the 
underworld where the Jews believed the souls of 
the sinful were punished. But this punishment 
was not believed by them to be endless, which is 
the point at issue. Nay, the penalties of Gehenna 
in this sense were by many of the Jews believed 
to be of brief, nay, of very brief duration. 

"He that shall blaspheme against the Holy 
Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in 

DANGER OF ETERNAL DAMNATION." — S. Mark m. 29. 

This passage is wholly silent as to endless 
torment; the harshest view of its meaning does 
not involve that: # a fact generally forgotten. 
The context too contains a very wide and elastic 
promise of forgiveness: "All their sins shall (in 

* I may, in passing, observe that it is very interesting to note the 
attitude of the Fathers towards the sin commonly called unpardon- 
able. "The notion," says Bixgham "That most of the antients 
"had of the sin against the Holy Ghost, was not that it was 
' ' absolutely unpardonable, but that men were to be punished 
" for it both in this world and in the next, unless they truly 
"repented of it." — ii. 921. So Athanasius says of this sin, "If 
' ' they repent they may obtain pardon, for there is no sin unpardon- 
"able with God to them who truly repent."— Ib. ii. 970. So S. 
Chrysostom, " We know that this sin was forgiven to some that 
•' repented of it." * * What is then the meaning of it ? That it is a 
sin less capable of forgiveness than all others. — lb. 971. So Victor, 
of Antioch, S. Ambrose, &c. Two points are very noteworthy, and I 
ask attention to them (i.) that these Fathers did not believe any sin 
to be in itself unpardonable, (ii.) that they did not believe the 
phrases eis ton aiona or aionios, to mean 6 never ' or £ everlasting' 
as our version renders them. 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 179 



" fact) be forgiven to the sons of men, and 
" blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blas- 
" pheme; but, &c." It also contains a very distinct 
hint as to forgiveness in a future age, for if some 
sins were not to be forgiven after death, S. Matt. 
xii. 32 could hardly have been written. The 
words translated 4 never ' are, literally, 4 for ' or 
4 during the age,' and rather imply that after 
that indefinite period forgiveness may be had, 
especially so when the repeated and unequivocal 
promises of the restitution of all things are con- 
sidered. A few words may be added on this 
terrible sin. It is the sin of the Scribes and 
Pharisees, i.e., of the hard, narrow religionist, and 
not of the ungodly. The sin itself is very clearly 
defined "because they said He hath an unclean 
" spirit," v. 30. Its essence lies in confounding 
the works of the good and evil Spirits, e.g., 
assigning to GrOD any kind of evil act. On this 
point I have already spoken (p.p. 33-4). Here I 
may just ask, must it not be a near approximation 
to this awful sin to assign to God deeds which, 
like endless torture, our conscience tells us are 
evil and cruel ? 

" Good were it for that man (Judas) if he had 
not been born." S. Mark xiv. 21. 

(a) The original seems to require a different 
rendering, 4 good were it for Him, i.e., Christ, if 
4 that man, i.e., Judas, had not been born.' — See 
margin of Revised Version, (b) When we 



180 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



remember how uncompromising in many cases 
are the Divine threats, which yet are subsequently 
wholly modified; and when on the other hand 
we remember the clear and repeated promises of 
universal salvation already quoted, we may well 
hesitate, and more than hesitate, before we put 
suchia sense on the woe pronounced on Judas, as 
to make it plainly contradict all these promises 
of Scripture, (c) Remember too the special 
promise that " all Israel shall be saved. Judas 
was assuredly an Israelite. (dj Remember 
further, that even if taken in their extremest 
sense, the words of Judas' doom wholly fail to 
prove that he was condemned to endless suffering. 
They would be satisfied to the utmost if Judas 
were to have a sentence of annihilation passed on 
him at the Last Great Day: nay, had he at the 
moment of betrayal died " and never suffered 
" one pang more they would be to the fullest 
" extent true." 

" The parable of Dives." S. Luke xvi. 26 

fa) Dives, like Judas, is a son of Abraham, 
who so addresses him, " and all Israel shall be 
" saved," says S. Paul, expressly, (b) Dives 
was certainly not in Hell, but in Hades (as our 
Revised Version admits), in the intermediate state 
before the Day of Judgement, not in a state 
absolutely fixed, (c) Dives is represented as 
distinctly improved by his chastisement: he has 
learned to think for others. Can God by His 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 181 



discipline produce this amendment merely to 
crush it out in a future state of hopeless pain f 
Is this credible? (d) It is not said that the 
gulf shall continue impassible; what is said is, 
that it is so (was then so). The case is as if a 
man were imprisoned for a fixed time, and his 
friends are sternly told "between him and you is 
" a barrier placed which cannot be passed/' This 
would be exactly true, though the barrier were 
to be removed, when the fixed period of punish- 
ment ceased, (e) And even were this not so, 
who are we to say that the gulf, impassable to 
man, cannot be passed bv Christ, by Him who 
hath the "Keys of Death and Hell?" (f) Those 
inclined to doubt what I have above said may be 
well referred to the words of the great S. 
Ambrose, who, commenting on Ps. cviii. says 
thus, " So then that Dives in the Gospel, 
" although a sinner, is pressed with penal agonies 
" that he may escape the sooner" thus asserting 
clearly his belief in Dives' final salvation. 

"He that believeth not the Son shall not 

see life." S. John iii. 36. 

Here the meaning is clear ; the unbeliever, 
continuing such, shall not see life, but if he cease 
to be an unbeliever, he may surely obtain peace. 
If it were not so, all would be lost. If the sense 
put popularly on this passage were true, 4 no man 
4 once an unbeliever could have any hope. 
" The Eesurrection of damnation." S. John v. 29 
Here it is hardly needful to do more than 



182 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



point to the revised translation, 4 the resurrection 
' of judgement J not even condemnation, which 
would be a different Greek word. 

We have now considered, if not all, yet cer- 
tainly all the strongest passages contained in the 
New Testament, and supposed to teach the 
popular creed, except those of the mysterious 
book of Revelation. To this now let us turn. 
And here, at the outset, I protest against the 
utter unfairness of attempting to build any 
definite theory of Hell on the imagery of a book 
of mysterious visions, and full of highly-toned 
Oriental metaphors. Its visions speak the 
language not of prose but of poetry, and that the 
poetry of an Eastern race, far more imaginative 
and highly wrought than that of the West. To 
judge these metaphors as though they spoke the 
language of theology is worse than unfair, it is 
even absurd. 

Take, then, the passages most often quoted. 
Turn to chapter xiv. 9-11. Terrible as it seems 
at first sight, it is really concerned with the 
times of Nero — who is the Beast. The worship- 
pers of the Beast who are to be tormented, are 
his followers, and the reference in the torment 
is simply to the terrible earthly calamities actually 
happening to Rome at that epoch. Who, of 
whatever school of thought, is there who does 
not feel a weight rolled away, when he perceives 



WHAT TEE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 1S3 



that the true meaning of the highly wrought 
metaphors of this passage — as to the worshippers 
of the Beast being tormented night and day, in 
the presence of the Lamb and the Holy Angels — 
may be most fully found in the terrible earthly 
sufferings which befell Rome, " while the Lamb 
"and the Holy Angels are, in human language, 
" represented as cognisant of this punishment ? 
" The smoke which ascends for ever and ever." 
should be for 'aeons of aeons,' 'ages of ages.' 
This is a phrase borrowed partly from Genesis 
xix, 28, and partly from Isaiah xxxiv. 9-10, both 
of which refer to temporal judgements, "and may 
" very well, in the highly figurative language of 
" prophecy, have such application in the Apoca- 
" lypse, without the remotest allusion to the state 
" of souls in the world beyond the grave." 
Even Mr. Elliott, in his Horce Apocalypticce, 
explains this passage of merely temporary judge- 
ment, see Mercy and Judgement, p. 470. Note 
too in this connection — as showing the true 
meaning of the highly wrought metaphors of the 
East — the deeply impassioned language in which 
Isaiah describes the temporal calamities of the 
land of Idumea (in the passage referred to above), 
its streams are " to be turned into pitch — its 
" dust into brimstone — its land into burning pitch 
" — it shall not be quenched night nor day — its 
" smoke is to go up for ever." Now when we 
know that these metaphors — sounding so awfully, 
do yet refer to merely temporal judgement — to 



184 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



judgements of a momentary duration, so to 
speak, we shall the better be able to assign its 
true meaning to all the figurative and poetical 
language of this book of Revelation. I therefore 
must ask you to bear ever in mind how unfair, 
nay, impossible, it is to harden into dogmas the 
glowing metaphors of Eastern poetry, if we 
desire to reach their true meaning. In fact, if 
such language be taken literally its whole mean- 
ing is lost. If, e.g., even in the case of some of 
our Lord's words, which are less figurative — 
I take them literally — I pervert their sense. Am 
I in very deed to hate my father and mother 
because Christ says it is necessary so to do : 
or to pluck out my right eye literally ? Or take 
a case — well put by Canon Farrar — to shew 
how widely the true sense of the figures of 
Scripture differs from the literal meaning. Egypt 
is more than once said, in the Bible, to have 
been an iron furnace to the Jews; and yet their 
condition there was so far removed from being 
one of torment, that they actually said, " it was 
" well with us there," and positively sighed for 
its enjoyments. In common fairness, therefore, 
I am forced to maintain that no doctrine of 
endless pain can be based on figures of Eastern 
imagery. Having then, already considered the 
well-known passage in ch. xiv., it will be 
sufficient if I close this chapter by an examina- 
tion of another often quoted passage. 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 185 



" But the fearful and unbelieving * * shall 
have their part in the lake that burneth 
with fire and brimstone : which is the 
second death." Revelation xxi. 8. 

(a) It will be necessary to consider the entire 
context of this verse, if we desire to understand 
its purport. It opens with the vision of the 
great white throne, ch. xx. 14, and we find that 
after the judgement of that Great Day, so far 
from death and Hell (Hades) continuing, they 
are " cast into a lake of fire" — very unlike, nay, 
contradicting the popular view. 

(b) Then comes a declaration, that God is to 
dwell with men — not with the saints — but with 
men as such, and that as a consequence, they 
shall be His people, and God shall be with them, 
and he their God. 

(c) It is distinctly said, there shall be no more 
death, neither sorrow, nor crying, nor any more 
pain. Is this not a denial of an endless Hell 
rather than an affirmation of it — nay an emphatic 
denial of such a doctrine? 

(d) Then comes a voice from the throne with 
a glorious promise, " Behold I make all things 
"new," not somethings. Note, too, this promise 
is remarkably emphasised, it opens with the word 
" Behold " to draw attention to it : it closes with 
the command to write it, ' for these words are 
'true and faithful.' Was there no reason for 
this ? Is there not thus attention drawn to this 
as the central point of the whole vision — all things 



186 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



made new ? But this again is a denial of the 
popular creed. 

(e) In close connection with such promises 
come the highly figurative threats of the lake of 
fire. It is perhaps just possible that this may 
imply, although I do not think so, the destruc- 
tion of those cast into it ; but it is wholly 
impossible to understand it as teaching endless 
torment in the face of what has just been 
promised— no more crying, nor pain, v. 4. There- 
fore, I cannot but conclude, looking at the repeated 
promises (see ' c ' and ' cl'j of this very passage, 
which contrast in their perfect clearness with the 
highly figurative language of its threats * looking 

O J CD CD CD I O 

at the true meaning of God's judgements and at 
the whole spirit of Holy Scripture — nay, its 
express declaration of universal pardon — that 
what is here taught is some sharp, fiery, discipline 
— a fire that purifies while it punishes — a fire 
that is, in God's mysterious way, an agent in 
making all things new. 

We thus see that the Apocalyptic visions lend 
as little support to the dogma of endless torment 



* ' How little can we build dogmas on such metaphors as the 
" Devil being cast with the Beasts (Nero and the Roman world - 
'* powers) and the false Prophet — ch. xx. 10-14 — into the lake of fire 
" and brimstone * * * into which also are to be cast two 
' ' such abstract entities as ' Death ' and ' Hades. ' At any rate this 
" lake of fire is on the earth ; and immediately afterwards we read of 
" that earth being destroyed, and of a new Heaven and a new earth, 
' ' in which there is to be no more death or curse.'" — Canon Farrar. 



WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 187 



as do the other Scriptures. That doctrine is not, 
I am deeply persuaded, to be found in a single 
passage of God's word, if translated accurately 
and fairly interpreted. And here let me, as I 
conclude this branch of our subject, before passing 
on, ask those who honestly believe, that with 
this dogma of Hell -fire is bound up the sole 
force able to deter men from sin, to remember 
that to assert this is to contradict the whole 
weight of human experience. For in every age 
experience has shewn decisively, that it is not 
the magnitude of the penalty that deters men 
from sin or crime, it is the certainty of its inflic- 
tion. Nay, it must be said on the contrary, that 
few doctrines have done so much in these days 
to shake the belief in any real punishment of sin 
hereafter as that of an endless Hell. For as I 
have already briefly attempted to prove (p. 38-9J 
nobody can be found who, by his acts, shews that 
he in fact believes and accepts so terrible a dogma. 
From this it follows, that so long as it is taught, 
the whole subject of future punishment becomes, 
for the mass of mankind, doubtful, shadowy, and 
unreal. Thus a tone of secret incredulity is 
fostered, an incredulity which, beginning at this 
particular dogma assuredly does not end there, 
but affects the whole of revealed religion. 

It is not merely that those who still teach the 
popular creed thus furnish the sceptic with the 
choicest of his weapons, by enlisting the moral 



188 WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACHES. 



forces of our nature on the side of unbelief. They 
do more than this. They thus, unconsciously I 
admit, but most effectively, teach men to profess 
a creed with the lips to which the spirit and the 
life render no vital allegiance. By this means 
the whole Gospel of Jesus Christ is lowered and 
discredited, for if men see a doctrine of this kind 
maintained in words but in fact denied, (because 
in practice found to be wholly incredible) they 
will assuredly apply the lesson, so learned, of 
professed belief and real scepticism, to the whole 
system of Christian truth. 



V 



CHAPTER IX. 



the scriptural doctrine of "tee ages," 
of "death," of "judgement;' "of fire," 
" of elections 

" The ende of their wrath and punyshemente intendeth nothynge 
*' elles but the destruction of vices and savynge of menne : wyth so 
" usyinge and ordering them that they cannot chuse but be good 
" and what harm so ever they did before, in the residewe of theyr, 
"life to make amendes for the same." — Sir T. More — Utopia. 

In the last chapter we have considered the 
proofs, often drawn from certain passages of the 
New Testament, in favour of the ordinary view 
of future punishment, and have seen how com- 
pletely they fail to teach its unending character 
when fairly translated and fairly understood. In 
the present chapter I propose to complete our 
examination of the Scriptural argument by a 
discussion of the teaching of the Bible as to the 
various topics referred to in the heading of this 
chapter, which have a very close relation to the 
subject of future punishment. To this discussion 
we now turn. 



190 THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



First, let us, in order to ascertain the scriptural 
doctrine of 4 the ages,' consider the true meaning 
of the words aion and aionios* These are the 
originals of the terms rendered hy our translators 
4 eternal/ 4 everlasting/ 4 for ever and ever : ' 
and on this translation, so misleading, and indeed 
wholly incorrect, a vast portion of the popular 
dogma of endless torment is built up. I say, 
without hesitation, misleading and incorrect ; for 
aion means ' an age,' a limited period, whether 
long or short, though often of indefinite length ; 
and the adjective aionios means ' of the age,' 4 age- 
4 long,' 4 aeonian ' and never 4 everlasting ' (of its 
own proper force) : it is true that it may be 
applied as an epithet to things that are endless, 
but the idea of endlessness in all such cases comes 
not from the epithet, but only because it is 
inherent in the object to which the epithet is 
applied, as in the case of God. Indeed so far 
from endless duration being implied by the term 



* "The word by itself, whether adjective or substantive, never 
" means endless." — Canon Farrar. " The conception of eternity. 
" iu the Semitic languages, is that of a long duration and series of 
" ages."— Rev. J. S. Blunt — Diet, of Theology. " 'Tis notoriously 
" known," says Bishop Rust, " that the Jews, whether writing in 
" Hebrew or Greek, do by olam (the Hebrew word corresponding to 
' ' aion) and aion mean any remarkable period and duration, whether it 
" be of life, or dispensation, or polity." " The word aion is never 
" used in Scripture, or any where else, in the sense of endlessness 
" (vulgarly called eternity), it always meant, both in Scripture and 
" out, a period of time ; else how could it have a plural — how could 
" you talk of the aions and aions of 030ns as the Scripture does." — C. 

KlNGSLEY. 



OF THE AGES. 



191 



aionios, it sometimes includes hardly any idea of 
duration at all. Sometimes, as in St. John, the 
aeonian life (eternal f life) of which he speaks is 
a life not measured by its duration, but a life in 
the unseen— life in God. Again, a point of 
great importance is this, that it would have been 
impossible for the Jews to accept Christ, except 
by assigning a limited — nay a very limited dura- 
tion — to those Mosaic ordinances which were said 
in the Old Testament to be 'for ever," to be 
'everlasting' (aeonian). Every line of the New 
Testament is thus in fact a comment on the limited 
seme of aionios. 

As a further illustration of the meaning of 
axon and aionios let me point out that in the 
Greek version of the Old Testament — in use in 
our Lord's time — and whose authority therefore 
should be decisive on this point — these terms are 
repeatedly applied to things that have long ceased 
to exist. Take a few instances out of many. 
Thus the Aaronic priesthood is said to be ' ever- 
lasting,' Num. xxv, 13. The land of Canaan is 
given as an 'everlasting' possession, and 'for 
' ever,' Gen. xvii. and xiii., 15. In Deut. xxiii, 
3, ' for ever ' is distinctly made an equivalent to 
'even to the tenth generation.' In Lam. v., 19, 



■f It is well to remember that in this book I have, as a rule, used 
the term ' eternal ' in its popular sense of eudiess. 



192 THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE. 



' for ever and ever ' is the equivalent of from 
'generation to generation.' The inhabitants of 
Palestine are to be bondsmen 'for ever,' Lev. 
xxv. 46. In Num. xviii. 19, the heave offerings 
of the holy things are a covenant ' for ever.' 
Caleb obtains his inheritance 4 for ever,' Josh. 
xiv. 9, etc. Another instance from the Old 
Testament may be found in Isaiah xxxii. 14, 
where we are told ' the forts and towers shall be 
' dens for ever, until the spirit be poured upon 
'us.' These instances* might be very largely 
increased, but enough has probably been said to 
prove that it is wholly impossible, and indeed 
absurd, to contend that any idea of endless dura- 
tion is necessarily implied by either aion or 
aionios. 

Notwithstanding all this, our translation, 
though often translating aion by terms which 
are strictly finite, has steadily adhered to the terms 
' eternal ' and ' everlasting ' as the equivalent of 
aionios ; against this we have only to offer the 
strongest protest. Further, if this translation of 
aionios as 'eternal' be correct, aion must mean 
eternity. But so to render it would reduce the 
word of God to an absurdity. Let me give you 
some instances of the result of translating aion 



* So in Jude vii. Sodom and Gomorrah are said to be suffering the 
vengeance of eternal (seonian) fire, i.e., their temporal overthrow by 
fire. 



OF THE AGES. 



193 



by eternity. In the first place, you would have 
over and over a^ain to talk of the ' eternities.' 

o 

We can comprehend what ' eternity ' is, but what 
are the ' eternities ? ' You cannot have more 
than one eternity. The Doxology would run 
thus : " Thine is the kingdom, the power and 
" the glory, ' unto the eternities.' " Take another 
instance. In the case of the sin against the Holy 
Ghost, the translation would then be, " it shall 
"not be forgiven him 'neither in this eternity 
" nor in that to come.' " Our Lord's words, St 
Matt. xiii. 39, would then run, " the harvest is 
"the end of (the) eternity," which is to make our 
Lord talk nonsense. Again, in St Mark iv. 19, 
the translation should be, " the cares," not of 
this world, but " the cares of this eternity choke 
"the word." In St. Luke xvi. 8, " The children 
"of this world " should be " the children of this 
" eternity." Romans vii. 2, should run thus : 
" Be not conformed to this eternity." In 1 Cor., 
x. 11, the words " upon whom the ends of the 
" world are come," should be " the ends of the 
"eternities." Take next, Gal. i. 4 : "That He 
" might deliver us from this present evil world," 
should run thus, " from this present evil eternity." 
In 2 Timothy iv. 10, the translation should be 
4 Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this 
4 present eternity. 1 Take a last example, 'Now 
4 once at the end of the ages hath He been mani- 
4 fested' should read, on the popular view, ' at the 
4 end of the eternities.' Let me state the dilemma 



194 THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



clearly. Axon either means eternity (endless 
duration) as its necessary or at least its ordinary 
significance, or it does not. If it does, the follow- 
ing difficulties at once arise : 1 — How, if it mean 
an infinite period, can axon have a plural ? 2 — 
How came such phrases to be used as those 
repeatedly occurring in Scripture, where axon is 
added to axon, if axon is of itself infinite ? 3 — 
v How come such a phrase as for the 6 axon ' and 
beyond ? — See (Sept.) Ex. 15-18 ; Dan. xii. 3 ; 
Micah iv. 5. 4 — How is it that we repeatedly 
read of the end of the axon ? — St. Matt. xiii. 
39-40-49 ; xxiv. 3 ; xxviii. 20 ; 1 Cor. xii. ; 
Heb. ix. 26-5. 5. Finally, if axon be infinite why is 
it applied over and over to what is strictly finite ? 
e.g., St. Mark iv. 19 ; Acts hi. 21 ; Bom. xii. 2 ; 
1 Cor. i. 20, ii. 6, iii. 18, x. 11, &c, &c. But if 
it be not infinite, what right is there to render the 
adjective aionios (which depends for its meaning 
on axon) by the terms ' eternal ' and ' everlasting?' 

There is much more to be said. Besides 
persisting in a rendering so misleading, our 
Translators have really done further hurt to 
those who can only read their English Bible. 
They have, in fact, wholly obscured, a very 
important doctrine, that of 'the ages,' This 
when fully understood throws a flood of light on 
the whole plan of redemption, and the method of 
the Divine working, as we shall see. It will be 
interesting if I give you a few instances to 



'OF THE AGES. 



195 



illustrate this fact. You will, I think, see how 
much force and clearness is gained by restoring 
to the Bible the true rendering of the words 
aion and aionios. I will begin by a well-known 
passage, S. Matt, xxiv. 3. There our version 
represents the disciples as asking Jesus 4 what 
4 should be the sign of the end of the world.' It 
should be the end of the 4 age,' the close, in fact, 
of the Jewish age or dispensation marked by the 
fall of Jerusalem. In S. Matt. xiii. 39-40-49, 
the true rendering is not the end of the 4 world,' 
but of the 4 age,' a change of much significance. 
So S. John xvii. 3, 4 this is life eternal,' should 
be 4 the life of the ages,' i.e., peculiar to those 
ages in which the scheme of salvation is being 
worked out. Or, take three passages of the 
Epistle to the Hebrews v. 9 ; ix. 12 ; and xiii. 
20, 4 eternal salvation ' should be 4 Ionian ' or of 
the ages; 4 eternal redemption ' is the redemption 
of the ages, the eternal covenant is the 4 covenant 
4 of the ages,' the covenant peculiar to the ages, 
of redemption. In Ephesians hi. 11, 4 the eternal 
4 purpose ' is really the purpose of 4 the ages,' i.e., 
developed, worked out in 4 the ages.' In the 
same Epistle, chapter hi. 21, there occurs a sug- 
gestive phrase, as usual altogether obscured by 
cur version, 4 unto all the generations of the age 
4 of the ages.' Thus it runs in the original, and 
it is surely not dealing fairly with God's word to 
wrap up this elaborate statement which gives such 
prominence to the 4 ages ' in the mere paraphrase 



196 THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



of our version 'throughout all ages.' In 1 Cor. 
x. 11, ' the ends of the world ' are the ' ends of 
' the ages.' In the same Epistle, chapter ii. 6-7-8, 
the word aion occurs four times translated ' world ' 
it should be ' age ' or ' ages ' in all cases. 

Again in Hebrews xi. 3, 'by whom He made 
the world' should be 'the ages.' In Hebrews 
ix. 26, ' now once in the end of the world hath 
'He appeared' should be 'in the end of the ages.' 
Again, the closing words of S. Jude present us 
with a remarkable instance of the use of this 
word aion* It is literally, ; To the only God, 
' be glory, majesty, dominion, and power — before 
' every age— and now, and unto all the ages,' i.e., 
before the a^es be^an, and now, and throughout 
all the ages yet to come. So in Rev. i. 6, we 
have ' glory and dominion' ascribed unto Christ, 
' unto the ages of the ages,' in the original. 
Again in 1 Tim. i. 17, 'the Kino- eternal ' should 
be * the King of ages;' vi. 17, 'charge them that 
' are rich in this world ' should be ' in this age.' 
2 Peter ii. 17, 'the mist of darkness is reserved 
' for ever ' should be ' for the age,' for a period 
finite but indefinite. A striking phrase closes 
this Epistle, ch. hi. 18 — wholly obscured in our 
translation — which renders ' to Him be glory 

* Take as an instance of the hard measure dealt by our Revised 
Version to this word aion; you will find in a very short compass — the 
epistle of S. Paul to the Ephesians — that it employs — to translate 
aion— four different English words or phrases (in ch. i. 21, ch. ii. 2, 7. 
and ch. iii. 11) . 



OF THE AGES. 



197 



'both now and for ever,' instead of, as the 
original requires, i unto the day of the age/ 
see v. 8, which explains the reference. This list 
I might, without difficulty, have increased, but 
enough has been said to shew the prominence 
given in Scripture to the doctrine ' of the ages.' 
For who can fail to see, in these repeated instances 
from Holy Scripture, at least some definite pur- 
pose in the use of these peculiar terms; or who 
can refrain from the deepest regret that our 
Translators should have so steadily refused to 
acknowledge this plain fact. 

Let me now try to state briefly and clearly 
what the doctrine of ' the ages' is. I borrow the 
words of Mr. Jukes : "It will, I think, be found 
"that the adjective — ceonian — whether applied 
" to ' life,' ' punishment,' ' covenant,' 4 times,' or 
" even God Himself, is always connected with 
"remedial labour, and with the idea of ages or 
"periods, in which God is working to meet and 
" correct some awful fall." There is present in 
the word in fact a certain spiritual or ethical 
force, and a reference to 4 the ages ' in which a 
redeeming process is going on. It is the more 
needful to insist on this, because in our recoil 
from the Roman Catholic teaching about purga- 
tory, masses for the dead, etc., we have gone too 
far into the opposite extreme, we have from our 
childhood been trained to limit all God's possible 
dealings with us, to the narrow span of our brief 



198 THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



earthly existence. But surely this is to shut our 
eyes to the truer and higher teaching" of the 
gospel. What does God mean by the repeated 
reference to these 4 ages/ when He speaks in the 
New Testament of His redeeming plan? On 
the popular view these passages go for nothing. 
Is this fair or reasonable ? But by accepting 
what they plainly teach, we are enabled to 
harmonize God's threatenings with His clearly 
expressed purpose to save all men finally. 

Therefore, we who teach the larger hope feel 
constrained to believe, that in these 4 ages ' is 
indicated the true scope of redemption, as a vast 
plan, the accomplishment of which is spread over 
many periods or stages, of which our present life 
forms but one, and it may be, a very brief part. 
Through these 4 ages ' it seems clearly taught in 
Scripture that Christ's work is to go on, for 
4 Christ is the same to-day, and yesterday, and 
'unto the ages,' Heb. xiii. 8; and He assures us 
that He is alive unto the ages, and has the 
4 keys of death and of Hades,' Rev. i. 18 (the 
true rendering), words significant in this con- 
nection. This, then, on the plain warrant of 
Scripture (although our translation completely 
obscures the fact), we believe to be the 4 purpose 
4 of the ages,' Eph. iii. 11. We believe that 
not in this brief life only, but through future 
ages, Christ's work shall go on till, as we hope 
from His own teaching, the last straying sheep 



OF THE AGES. 



199 



shall have been found by the Good Shepherd. 
Nay, we are permitted in Holy Scripture a 
momentary glance beyond that limit — in these 
all-glorious words:—' Then,' at the expiry it 
would seem of these ages,* ' cometh the end, 1 
when every enemy vanquished, ' Christ shall 
' have delivered up the kingdom unto God, and 
4 God shall be All in All.'— 1 Cor. xv. 24. 

Another class of texts, to which I ask your 
attention, are those which speak of 6 death ' and 
' destruction ' as the portion of the ungodly. 
To ascertain the true meaning, let us enquire 
what is meant by death 

There are two answers commonly given. 
First comes that of the popular creed which says 
death in the case of sinners means living for ever 
in pain and torment ; so that I am actually 
required to believe that death means life pro- 
tracted for ever in pain, and that destruction 
means preservation in eternal anguish! The 
recoil from such incredible teaching has produced 
the second view of 6 death ' as meaning ' annihi- 
' lation,' now maintained by those who teach the 
doctrine of ' conditional immortality.' — See 
pp. 11-3. 



* It is worth while reminding my readers that our Revised Version 
has very frequently admitted the correct rendering of aion as age into 
the margin. Let us hope that in the final revision, which one day 
must be undertaken, this rendering will appear in the text. 



200 



THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



In answer to this strange and novel teaching,* 
I would ask, in the words of an author already 
quoted, " are any of the varied deaths which 
" Scripture speaks of as incident to man, his non- 
" existence or annihilation? Take as examples 
"the deaths referred to by S. Paul, in the sixth, 
" seventh and eighth chapters of the Epistle to 
" the Romans. We read (ch. vii. 7) ' He that is 
" dead is free from sin.' Is this ' death' which 
" is freedom from sin, non-existence or annihila- 
"tion? Again, when the Apostle says (ch. vii. 
"9) 'I was alive without the law once, but when 
" the commandment came sin revived, and I 
" died.' Was this ' death,' wrought in him by 
" the law, annihilation? Again, when he says 
" (ch. viii. 6), 'To be carnally minded is death,' 
"is this death non-existence or annihilation? 
" And again, when he says (ch. viii. 38) ' Neither 
" death nor life shall separate us,' is the ' death ' 
" here referred to annihilation ? When Adam 
"died on the day he sinned (Gen. ii. 17), was 
" this annihilation ? when his body died, and 
"turned to dust (Gen. v. 5), was this annihila- 
" tion ? Is our 'death in trespasses and sins' 
" (Eph. ii. 1-2) annihilation? Is our 'death to 
"sin' (Rom. vi. 11), annihilation. * * Do 



* See pages 2-3 for some remarks on this theory, which I do not 
discuss at any length persuaded that it has no prospect of permanent 
acceptance (i. ) as being opposed to the deepest instincts of our nature 
(ii. ) being founded on a wholly superficial view of Scripture (iii ) as 
leaving quite untouched the great central difficulty of the triumph 
of evil, a point forgotten by its ablest champions. 



OF DEATH. 



201 



44 not these and similar uses of the word prove 
" beyond all question, that whatever else these 
" deaths may be, not one of them is non- 
u existence or annihilation?" 

But if death be neither living for ever in pain, 
nor annihilation, what then is it? Death is 
bodily dissolution; it is for man 'a separation 
4 from some given form of life which he has lived 
'in;' it is the way out of one state of being into 
another. Thus understood, how should death 
shut out hope? Nor is it really opposed to life, 
in fact it is a pathway to life; nay, the very con- 
dition of life in many cases. 4 Except a corn of 
4 wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth 
'alone, but if it die it bringeth forth much fruit, 
S. John vii. 24.* Is there not here a great truth 
hinted at of universal application ? Is not the 
connection of a very real and vital one between 
dying and life? and so the Apostle says that 4 he 
' that is dead is freed from sin,' Rom. v. 27, i.e., 
is alive to God. Cannot it be that this death 
threatened against the ungodly is, after all, the 
way, however sharp, to life even for them? The 
words of S. Paul, Rom. xi. 15, 'what shall the 
4 reconciling of them be but life from the dead ;' 



* I confine myself, in attempting to bring out the true significance 
of ' death ' to the New Testament. In the Old Testament its 
threatenings, of 4 death ' and ' destruction,' are, if not exclusively, 
mainly temporal, as are its rewards. 



202 THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



on the view generally held these words, so sig- 
nificant to the thoughtful, lose all real force. 

And yet those who uphold the popular creed 
assume that to die is the end of all hope to the 
sinful. Again, let me ask, on what authority is 
this docrine taught, unknown to antiquity, 
unknown to Scripture ? Who commissioned any 
to teach, that to die is to pass into a state beyond 
the reach of Christ's grace? If so, why are we 
told so significantly, the story of Christ evangel- 
ising the spirits in prison ? Why does the 
Apostle tell us that the Gospel was preached to 
the dead ? or why these repeated and exultant 
questions, 4 0 death where is thy victory ? ' '0 
4 death where is thy sting ? ' Why has the New 
Testament, with such varied illustrations, pressed 
on us this fact, that Christ has overcome death, 
has destroyed death, if death is to put a stop to 
His power to save? So far from this, S. Paul 
in aid of his argument in the famous chapter on 
the resurrection, invokes the analogy of nature, 
as shewing that death is a path to life, a condition 
of life. 4 Thou fool,' says the great Apostle, 
4 that which thou sowest is not quickened except 
4 it die.' 

Who shall limit this truth in its operation ? 
It certainly does hold good in many cases in the 
spiritual order — of that we are assured. ' If we 
4 be dead with Him, we shall live with Him.' — 



OF DEATH. 



203 



2 Tim. ii. 11. 'We which live are always 
4 delivered unto death for Jesus' sake, that the 
'life also of Jesus might be manifested in us.' — 
2 Cor. iv. 11. And so it is written. ' He that 
1 loseth his life shall save it ' — a statement often 
repeated in the gospels. 4 And if ye mortify the 
c deeds of the body ye shall live.' Thus, too, the 
Psalmist strikingly prays ' that the wicked may 
' perish, in order that they may know that God 
' reigns over the earth.' May not death then 
be the very instrument by which God quickens 
the sinner, and that in two ways ? 

i. By the death of the body, which 
takes a man out of the present age 
into a state more fitted to rouse and to save. 

ii. By the death of the spirit, i.e., its being 
searched through and through by God's fiery 
discipline — by His sharp surgery — till it die to 
sin and live to righteousness. 

In all this subject of death there is a strange 
narrowness in the views yet held generally, so 
unlike the old faith of the Catholic Church — so 
blindly traditional — as though the fact of dying 
could change God's unchanging purpose; as 
though His never failing love were extinguished 
because we pass into a new state of existence; as 
though the power of Christ's cross were 
exhausted in the brief span of our earthly life. 
So far from this, has not Christ abolished 
death ? Is He not Lord of the dead f Did He 



204 THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



not evangelise the dead ? Has He not the keys 
of death t On the popular view, what depth of 
meaning can you assign to these words ? 

This view of 1 death ' and e destruction ' 
has the fullest theological authority. In 
its favour many passages might be cited from 
Fathers, and modern theologians alike. The 
general principle is clearly put by Tertullian 
in the following words — " Thus all things are 
"repaired by corrupting, are preserved by 
u perishing, and revive by dying." — Apol. 48. 
Perhaps I ought here to ask my readers to refer 
to pp. 84-5, where they will find some interesting 
patristic citations on this point, e.g., those 
which regard death as a remoulding by the 
heavenly Potter of the earthly vessels He has 
made, in order to remove all flaws. I add also 
the following, which take the same view of 
death. So S. Clement asserts that " the law 
" in ordering the sinner to be put to death 
" (tolli de medio) designs his being brought from 
" death to life." — Strom, lib. vii. In the same 
sense Origen comments on the words, " When 
" He slew them then they sought Him." — Psalm 
lxxviii. 34. " He does not say that some sought 
" Him after others had been slain, but He says 
'"that the destruction of those who were killed 
"was of such a nature that, when put to death, 
" they sought God." — De prin. ii. 8. " The 
" Scriptures," says S. Methodius (3rd century), 



OF DEATH. 



205 



" usually call destruction, the turning to the 
" better at some future time." — De resur. viii. 

S. Gregory, of Nyssa, has much to the 
same effect. "It is impossible that life should 
"be in man unless it enters by death," and he 
adds forcibly, " Si non moriatur anima, semper 
" manet mortua." — In Cant. C antic. Perhaps 
the most striking passage is one in which he 
refers to the 4 second death.' " They who live 
" in the flesh ought, by virtuous conversation, to 
" free themselves from fleshly lusts, lest after 
" death, they should again need another death, to 
" cleanse away the remains of fleshly vice that 
" cling to them." — De anin. et resurr. This 
shows this eminent Father as teaching the 
cleansing and healing agency of even the 
' second death.' Again we find S. Gregory 
thus writing on the 59th Psalm, where the 
destruction of God's enemies is spoken of. 
" From which consideration we understand that 
" there will not be a destruction of the 
"individuals themselves, lest God's handiwork 
" should come to nothing, but that in place of 
" their persons, their sin shall perish, and shall 
" be annihilated. * * For when no guilt is 
" any where left, God shall be sovereign of the 
" ends of the earth ; when the evil that now 
" reigns over many shall have been taken 
" away." — (See page 120^ u When the Psalmist 
" prays, let sinners and the unrighteous be 



206 THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



" destroyed, he is (really) praying that sin and 
" unrighteousness may perish. * * His 
" prayer is that sin may come to an end." — De 
orat. Or. i. The passage continues thus — 
" And if there he found any such prayer else- 
u where (in the Scriptures), it has exactly the 
" same meaning, viz., that of expelling the sin, 
" and not of destroying the man." — lb. 

I now turn to S. Jerome, whose views on 
this point have already been quoted (pp. 97-119). 
The following is interesting — "All God's 
" enemies shall perish, not that they shall cease 
" to exist, hut cease to be enemies. 11 And note 
how far S. Jerome pushes this principle, even it 
would seem to asserting the salvation of the 
w Man of sin,' for the passage proceeds thus — 
" Just as S. Paul writes to the Thessalonians 
" (of the Man of sin), whom the Lord shall slay 
" with the breath of His mouth. (So) This 
" slaying signifies not annihilation but the 
" cessation of the evil life in which they formerly 
"used to live." — In Mic. v. 8. Elsewhere S. 
Jerome represents God as saying, *' Ideo occido 
" ut vivificem." — In Es. lvii, words which 
comprise the whole view of death as taught in 
the Scriptures. Of modern writers I shall quote 
two only. " None," says Canon Westcott, 
" can fail to see, upon reflection, how the two 
" Sacraments speak of death, and life through 
" death, of life given away, and life received 



OF JUDGEMENT. 



207 



" again." — Hist. Faith. " In some most 
t£ wonderful sense man must die, that he may be 
" delivered from his pravity." — Maurice, Theol. 
"Essays" 

And what is true of ' death ' as threatened 
against the sinner is true no less of 'judgement,' 
even in its most extreme form. We are not 
without very distinct teaching in Holy Scripture 
on this point. It has been already noticed how, 
in the minor Prophets, the vision of universal 
bliss is ever associated with a vision of 
''judgement'' (see pp. 129-31). Why is this so 
significantly done ? It is because the way to 
blessedness lies through the Divine judgements. 
In these often unperceived connections lies 
surely much of the deepest teaching of Holy 
Scripture. On the popular view this connection 
of judgement and blessedness loses all meaning. 
4 Judgement,' in fact, like 4 fire,' is the portion 
of all, and not of the sinner merely. It must 
begin at the House of God. £ He scourgeth 
£ every son whom He receiveth.' True — you 
may say of the son — but what of the sinner, is 
there hope for him in God's judgements ? Does 
God's judgement mean mercy in his case? Surely, 
I reply, of this truth Scripture is full. Take 
for instance S. Peter's words, as he tells the 
story of the preaching of Christ to the spirits in 
prison (a passage that even if it stood alone 
would shew how untenable is the popular view 



208 THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



as to the state after death). The spirits are 
specially described as those of the disobedient 
dead — those who rejected Noah's preaching. 
From their case S. Peter turns to speak to the 
ungodly of his own day, and warns them, that 
they shall have to give account to Him who is 
ready to judge the quick and dead. And mark 
what follows : ' For this cause,' he adds, ' was 
' the gospel preached, (even) to the dead, that 
4 they might be judged according to men in the 
'flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.' 
Is not judgement here most closely related, not 
to damnation, for the sinner, but to spiritual 
life, is it not the path to life ? 

Would you have further proof? Consider 
next what S. Paul says of the case of Hymens us 
and Alexander — 1 Tim. i. 20. They had put 
away a good conscience, had become 
blasphemers, had made shipwreck of faith. He 
thereupon hands them over to Satan. You can 
hardly imagine a more desperate state. Thrust 
by Apostolic authority out of God's Church, and 
handed over to God's enemy, and that after 
having made shipwreck of their faith. But 
what follows ? It is that they may learn not to 
blaspheme. This terrible judgement was a cure 
— a path to life and restoration. " The Devil," 
says S. Jerome in his striking way, "is, as it 
" were, God's executioner. They who 
" walk not rightly are handed over to the 



OF JUDGEMENT. 



209 



u Devil. Wherefore ? That they may perish 
" eternally ? And where then is the mercy of 
" God ? Where is the tender Father ? What 
" the Apostle says is this, I have handed over 
" sinners to the Devil, that, tormented by him, 
" they may be converted to me." — In Psalm 
107. 

In this connection, as shewing how the 
utmost conceivable severity of the Divine 
judgements is consistent with final salvation. I 
ask you next to remember how S. Paul tells of 
Israel that ' wrath is come upon them to the 
4 uttermost.' — 1 Thess. ii. 16. The wrath of 
God to the uttermost! and yet the same Apostle 
tells us that all Israel shall be saved ! Weigh 
well these words and what they convey. It is 
as though the cup of Divine vengeance was 
drained to the last drop, as though God had 
exhausted all His vials of anger, and left 
Himself no more than He could do. And even 
then does all this wrath mean that hope is at an 
end, that salvation is impossible ? It means the 
very reverse. Not only is hope still remaining, 
not merely is there a chance of salvation, but 
salvation is promised, is assured ; nay, salvation 
in its amplest form — salvation to the uttermost 
(for all Israel shall be saved) — is the end of 
wrath to the uttermost. 

Another equally striking instance of the 



210 THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



connection of judgement with life and amend- 
ment, is furnished by S. Paul's treatment of the 
incestuous Corinthian. 'I have judged already 
1 in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to 
' deliver such an one unto Satan for the 
4 destruction of the flesh, that the Spirit may be 
'saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.' — 1 Cor. 
v. 3. Few more suggestive passages exist in 
the New Testament. Here is a man delivered 
by Apostolic authority — in the name of Jesus 
Christ — to Satan, handed over to Satan. But 
mark the object and the result. It is to end not 
in misery but in joy — not in death but in life — 
say rather in life attained by means of God's 
awful judgement.* What light is thus thrown 
(for are not these things written for our 
learning ?) on the mysterious subject of God's 
judgements — nay of His vengeance.f 44 0 mon 
" ame sois tranquille et attends en paix le jour 
44 des vengeances eternelles, c'est le jour de 
44 Christ, et ce sont les vengeances de Christ. 
44 C'est done un jour de salut, et ce sont des 
" vengeances $ amour" — G. Moxod, Le Judge- 
ment dernier, p. 28. 

* " Destruction itself may be the very condition of salvation. 
" * * * This wretched Corinthian was, as we know, 
' 1 delivered from the power of the Devil by being delivered into the 
" power of the Devil." — The Larger Hope. 

f Bearing in mind these considerations, can we not understand 
the otherwise strange insertion of the clause about vengeance in the 
well known passage describing Christ's mission. " To proclaim the 
" acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God." 
— Isaiah lxi, 2 ? 



OF JUDGEMENT. 



211 



And so the fact of God's coming to judgement 
is a matter of deep joy. The Psalmist bids the 
sea to roar, the floods to clap their hands, the 
hills to sing for joy, at the prospect of judgement 
(as being a part of the great scheme of redemp- 
tion). So deeply important at once, and yet so 
generally misunderstood is this (the only true 
and Scriptural view of judgement), that it will 
be needful to examine more closely the testimony 
of God's word on this point. The more we 
study its pages, the more clear does the fact 
become, that salvation is essentially linked with 
the divine judgements. "Thou, Lord, art 
" merciful, " says the Psalmist, "for thou 
" renderest to every man according to his 
" work." Here is the essence of the question — 
retribution is mercy, judgement means salvation. 
" The thought," says Maurice, " of God's 
" ceasing to punish is the real — the unutterable 
" horror. Wrath is not the counteracting force 
" to love, but the attribute of it." So the 
Prophet tells us that Israel has been pardoned 
because she has been punished. — Is. xl. 1-2. 
So it is scid, "Zion shall be redeemed with 
" judgement ■." — Is. i. 27. When thy judgements 
4 4 are in the earth the inhabitants of the world 
u learn righteousness, for the Lord is a God of 
"judgement." — Is. xxvi. 9. " A king shall 
" reign in righteousness, and princes shall rule 
" in judgement, and a man shall be an hiding 
4 place from the wind." — Is. xxxii. 1. "The 



212 TEE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



" Lord hath filled Zion with judgement * # 
"and there shall be abundance of salvation." — ■ 
Is. xxxiii. 5-6. " I will make my judgement 
" to rest for a light of the peoples. * # My 
" salvation is gone forth. ?> — Is. 1L 4-5. Again 
speaking of Christ as the branch, the Prophet 
tells how " He shall execute judgement # * in 
" the land. In those days Judah shall be saved." 
— Jer. xxxiii. 15. And "I will betroth thee 
" unto me for ever * * in judgement and in 
"mercy/' — Hos. ii. 19. See, too, Ps. lxxxii. 8, 
Ezech. xxxiv, 16, &c. 

From the New Testament I have already 
given some quotations, but ample proof remains 
worthy of our closest study, and shewing the 
true meaning of judgement, alike here and here- 
after, as conveying salvation. Take for instance 
the context, so often overlooked, of oar Lord's 
famous words, S. John xii. 32 — " Now is the 
" judgement of this world, now shall the prince 
"of this world be cast out. And I, if I be 
"lifted up will draw all men unto me." The 
judgement of the world is the salvation of the 
world, is the drawing of all men to Christ. 
No less striking are the words of S. Paul, 
which refer to the last judgement, and shew 
conclusively that, that Great Day brings salvation 
to all who are judged. Turn to Rom. xiv T . 10 — 
" We must all stand before the judgement seat 
"of Christ," must each render his account to 



OF JUDGEMENT. 



213 



God. But that is far from being the only object 
of that judgement. Its main and essential 
purpose is salvation. To shew this is easy. For 
note, that to illustrate the purpose of God in 
judging, S. Paul here quotes from Is. xlv. 23, 
which runs thus — " Look unto me and be ye 
" saved, all ye ends of the earth, for I am God, 
" * * I have sworn by myself that unto me 
"every knee shall bow. * * The word is 
"gone out, and shall not return;" it must be 
fulfilled, i.e., God's purpose of salvation must 
reach effectually the entire race (see p. 127). 
But this prophetic assertion of a • universal 
salvation is here quoted by the Apostle, and is 
linked with the Day of Judgement, which according 
to him, it describes. In that Judgement S. Paul 
sees not the final damnation of any man, but the 
fulfilment of the prophetic promise — a pledge 
that salvation shall reach every soul of man. 
Do pause, and realise the full significance of this ! 
Beyond the grave, after death, and its changes, 
we have S. Paul looking on to the closing scene; 
to that Judgement which winds up the great 
Drama of life, and sin, and redemption. And as 
the Apostle looks he sees a picture bright with 
hope for every human soul — a picture which he 
can only describe in terms of the joyful outburst 
of the Prophet, "Look unto me Midi-be ye saved 
" all ye ends of the earth." 



Bearing all this in mind, a light, clear and 



214 THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



distinct, falls on those words of S. Paul (so 
unintelligible on the ordinary view), where he 
declares the gospel to be " the power of God 
" unto salvation, * * for therein is the 
" wrath of God revealed." Note salvation and 
wrath linked together, salvation because the 
wrath of God is revealed against all sin. S. 
Peter's teaching on this point has been already 
referred to (pp. 207-8). Let us next take an 
interesting passage from S. John, " I saw 
" another angel, having the everlasting gospel to 
" proclaim to all them that dwell on the earth, 
" and he said, fear God and give Him glory, for 
" the hour of His judgement is come." — Rev. 
xvi. 14. Note the everlasting gospel proclaimed 
— how? By God's judgements. 

This view of God's judgement is, be it noted, 
no modern fancy ; it is precisely the teaching of 
antient Catholic Fathers, which I shall here give. 
Take in proof S. Jerome's very striking com- 
ment on Zeph. iii. 8-10. There, speaking of 
the Day of Judgement and its terrors, he says, 
" The nations are gathered to the Judgement, 
" * # that on them may be poured out all the 
" wrath of the fury of the Lord, * * and this 
" * * in pity, and with a design to heal — 
" for the nations being assembled for judgement, 
" in order that wrath may be poured out on 
" them, not in part but in whole, both wrath and 
u fury being united ; then, whatever is earthy is 



OF JUDGEMENT 



215 



"consumed in the whole world * * in order 
"that every one may return to the confession of 
u the Lord, that in Jesus' name every knee may 
" bow, and every tongue may confess that He is 
" Lord." Need I point out the extreme signifi- 
cance of these words? They are unhesitating in 
their frank recognition of, nay, in the emphasis 
laid on ' the wrath of the fury of the Lord] ' the 
' whole mass both of wrath and fury, 1 at the Great 
Day of Judgement. But this ' wrath of fury ' is 
but a proof of love, a means of salvation ! The 
Great Day of Wrath that is to burn like fire, 
and to consume the adversaries of God, burns up 
only what is earthy, bringing to every sinner 
salvation! Again we have S. Jerome comment- 
ing on Bom. i. 18. ' Therein is the Wrath of God 
i revealed against all ungodliness,' " where wrath 
" is revealed it is not inflicted; it does not smite, 
u but it is revealed in order that it may terrify, 
" and may not be inflicted on the terrified." — In 
Hob. iii. 

So deeply important, and so unfamiliar to the 
great majority, is this aspect of Patristic teaching, 
that I feel it right to continue these quotations 
in proof of God's judgement, as implying to all 
men salvation. I give next the substance of 
an interesting passage on the final judgement 
from the same Father. Writing on Micah vii. 
17, he compares the wicked to serpents, who, as 
they creep over the earth, drag along with them 



216 THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



earthly matter. So the wicked, who bring with 
them a mass of earthly sinful matter to God's 
judgement (the original is very emphatic in 
dwelling on the mass of sin), 4 shall be 
4 troubled so long as the sinful matter clings to 
4 them? But when (by the judgement) this has 
been cleared away, they too shall end by fearing 
God. On verse 18, S. Jerome continues his 
comment thus : 44 God pours out His wrath in 
" order that He may shew mercy." Next, I quote 
the following : "I shall judge thee in order that in 
"this (judgement) I may shew forth my mercy, 
44 like a physician, who does not spare, in order 
" that he may spare." — In Ezech. xxiv. Again, 
commenting on Nahum i. 8, this Father says, 
44 If you think Him cruel who destroyed the 
human race, who rained fire on Sodom 
" and Gom'orrha, learn that He punished them 
44 in order that He might not punish them 
"eternally." I close these citations from S. 
Jerome with the following" suggestive comment 
of his on Ps. clx. : " Magna est ira Dei quanclo 
non nobis irascatur" — See for similar language 
of this Father, pp. 97 and 119. 

Equally forcible and clear is the teaching of S. 
Gregory of Nyssa. — See p. 119. "Therefore 
"the Divine judgement does not, as its chief 
" object, cause pain to those who have sinned, 
44 but works good alone by separating from evil, 
"and drawing to a share in blessedness. But 



OF JUDGEMENT. 



217 



"this severance of good from evil causes the pain 
" (of the judgement)." In other words the 
penalty is the cure ; it is merely the unavoidable 
pain attending the removal of the intruding 
element of sin. — De an. et resur. And again, 
" If this (sin) be not cured here, its cure is postponed 
" to a future life. As sharp remedies for obstinate 
" cases, so God announces His future judgement 
u for the cure of the diseases of the soul, and 
" ( note these words) u that judgement uses threats 
" to the lazy and vain * * in order that 
" through fear we may be trained to avoiding 
" evil ; but hy those who are more intelligent, it 
" (the judgement) is believed to be a medicine* 
" a cure from God, who is bringing the creature, 
" which he has formed, back to that state of 
" grace which first existed." — Cat. orat. viii. 

I leave these words without further comment 
to the thoughtful reader, who will readily see all 
they imply. It will be interesting to compare 
with them the following from Didymus : "For 
" although the judge at times inflicts tortures 
" and anguish on those who merit them, yet he 
" who more deeply scans the reasons of things, 
" perceiving the purpose of His goodness, who 



* S. Gregory does not mean to deny the terror of the Judgement 
Day. Hear his words. "All creation trembles, who is without 
"fear? Not even the angels, though they have no account to 
"render, yet the glorious presence (of God) causes fear to all." — 
In verba fox. horn. orat. ii. 



218 THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



" desires to amend the sinner, confesses Him to 
" be good. He who is our Lord and Saviour 
" inflicts on us everything that may lead us to 
" salvation : inflicting on us according to His 
" mercy, yet doing this in His judgement/' — 
De Sp. San. lib. ii. Again writing on the 57th 
Psalm, S. Gregory says that the wrath of God, 
which is to swallow up the sinful, is not wrath 
at all. " In the case of God, His wrath, though 
" to sinners it seems wrath, and is so called by 
" them, is nothing less than wrath (i.e., is not 
" wrath at all), but as a quasi-wroth comes to 
" those who, according to God's justice, call it a 
" retribution, but God Himself is not really angry" 
Origen goes quite as far as S. Gregory or S. 
JerOxME. " When thou hearest of the wrath of 
" God, believe not that this wrath is a passion of 
" God. It is a condescension of language, 
" designed to convert and improve the child. * * 
" So God is described to us as angry, in order to 
" our conversion and improvement, when in 
"truth He is not angry."— Ed. Huet. f. 378. 

Next, a few words must be added as to the true 
place ' tire ' holds in the teaching of the New 
Testament. It, like judgement, so far from 
being the sinner's portion only, is the portion of 
all. Like God's judgement, again it is not 
future merely, but present ; it is as the New 
Testament says, ''already kindled,'' i.e., always 



OF FIRE. 



219 



kindled : its object is not torment but cleansing. 
The proof is easy and unanswerable, coming from 
the lips of our Lord Himself. He it is who 
says, " I am come to send fire on the earth" 
words that in fact convey all I am seeking to 
teach, for it is certain that He came as a 
Saviour. Thus corning to save, Christ conies 
with fire, nay with fire already kindled. He 
comes to baptise with the Holy Ghost, and with 
fire. Therefore, it is that Christ teaches in a 
solemn passage (usually misunderstood, S. Mark 
ix. 43) that every one shall be salted with fire. 
And so the " fire is to try every man's work." 
He whose work fails is saved (mark the word 
saved), not damned, ' so as by fire,' for God's 
fire, by consuming what is evil, saves and refines 
the suffering sinner. The same truth we find in 
the Old Testament. The Prophet Isaiah tells 
us of God's cleansing the daughters of Zion by 
the spirit of judgement, and the spirit of burning 
(ch. iv. 4) suggestive words. And again, ' By fire 
will the Lord plead with all flesh. ' — Is. lx vi. 1 6 . And 
so Malachi describes Christ as being in His saving 
work 'Like a refiner's fire' (ch. hi. 3). One 
other passage I take from the Old Testament 
because it is echoed in the New, and shows the 
merciful character of the Divine fire: we find 
God described thus — " Thy God is a consuming 
fire" and a few verses further on, " Thy God is 
a merciful God " Deut. iv. 24-31 ; most apt and 
significant this juxta-position ! And so in Heb. 



220 THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



we have " Our God is a consuming fire," «'.e., 
God in His closest relation to us : God is love, 
God is spirit, but ' Our God is a consuming 
fire V — a consuming fire, says S. Gregory, " by 
" which the whole material substance of sin is 
" destroyed," i.e., by which not the sinner but the 
sin is consumed. — Cont. Eunom. or at. i.v. 

So far from seeking to explain away the 
solemn warnings of the Gospel, the larger hope 
in fact presses them home. It warns everyone 
that the way to life lies through the 'fires,' that 
the cross must either be taken up here and now, 
or else if sin be indulged in, that there awaits the 
sinner hereafter a far more terrible ordeal — a 
keener ' fire ' that shall search him through 
and through. We, then, who teach hope for all 
men, dp not shrink from, but accept, in their 
fullest meaning, those mysterious 'fires' of 
Gehenna, of which Christ speaks (kindled for 
purification), as in a special sense the sinner's 
doom in the coming ages. If, as the Bible plainly 
teaches, all must pass through 'the fires,' then 
for the sinner doubtless a far sharper fire must be 
kindled hereafter. Bat taught by the clearest 
statements of Scripture (confirmed as they are 
by all the analogies of nature), we see in these 
' fires ' not a denial of, but a mode of fulfilling 
the assured promise — " Behold, I make all things 
new.' 1 They in fact are but mistaking the whole 
significance of fire in its Scriptural usage, who 



OF FIRE. 



221 



regard it as implying merely torment. Alike 
nature and Scripture teach a far different lesson 
as to the uses of ' fire.' Its mission is to bless 
and to purify. It sustains life and cherishes it. 
Nay, it is the very condition of life. Take away the 
fires stored in the world, and you take life away. 
No doubt it has a mission of destruction, but even 
then its agency is in the end to promote and call 
forth fresh life and growth. 

Had these facts been borne in mind, how much 
painful controversy would have been spared : 
how many sad hearts would have escaped 
needless pangs, if they had but remembered or 
been taught, the beneficent action of fire. For 
again and again recalling this fact, and trying to 
impress it on the minds of men no apology is 
needed. Few more necessary offices can be 
undertaken by those who treat of this subject, 
than to assert the life - giving, the cleansing, the 
purifying agency of fire, in opposition to that 
untrue and gloomy view that looks on it as an 
agent of mere torment. " 'Fire,' in Scripture, is 
" the element of ' life ' (Is. iv. 5), of ' purifica- 
tion ' (Matt. iii. 3), of ' atonement' (Lev. xvi. 
"27), of 'transformation' (2 Peter, iii. 10), and 
" at the worst only of ' total destruction ' (Rev. 
" xx. 9), never of ' preservation alive ' for 
"purposes of anguish." And the popular view 
selects precisely this latter use, never found in 
Scripture, and represents it as the sole end of 



222 THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



God's fiery judgments ! Need I say more ? By 
such means as this has the traditional creed been 
built up ; on arguments so unsound, so partial 
does it rest : arguments whose weakness is 
brought into clear relief by the very Scriptures 
to which it appeals, even without considering the 
abundant evidence, furnished by nature, of the 
beneficent agency of fire. 

Abundant quotations might be made from the 
Fathers in support of the above view of fire. 
Let St. Ambrose speak. Writing on Ps. cxviii, 
"All," he says, u must be proved by fire, as many 
" as desire to return to Paradise. For, not idly 
" has it been written, that when Adam and Eve 
" were driven forth from Paradise, God placed 
" at the gate thereof a flaming sword which 
"turned every way. All then must pass 
through these fires; whether it be that John 
" the Evangelist, whom the Lord so loved, or 
" that Peter who received the keys of the King- 
" dom of Heaven." — Serm. xx, 12. To the same 
effect speak other Fathers. S. Hilary writes, 
" They that are baptised with the Holy Ghost are 
" yet to be perfected by the fire of judgement." 
From Origen, I take the following : As bodily 
diseases require some nauseous drug, or it may 
be the amputating knife, or if this fail, actual 
cautery, " how much more is it to be understood 
" that God, our Physician * * should employ, 
"for healing, penal measures, and even the 



OF FIRE. 



223 



"punishment of fire. * * The fury of GocVs 
" vengeance is profitable for the purgation of 
" souls. That the punishment, which is said to 
" be applied by fire, is applied with the object of 
" healing, is taught by Isaiah iv. 4." S. 
Jerome, as usual, has much that is interesting on 
this subject of fire. Writing on Amos iv., he 
says " Fire is God's last medicine for the ten 
"tribes, and for heretics, and for all sinners" 
that after God has tried death and destruction 
and they have not even then repented, "he may 
" overthrow the in as He did Sodom and 
"Gomorrah; that when overthrown, and when 
" the Divine fire shall have burned up all that is 
" vilest in them, they themselves shall be delivered 
" as a brand snatched from the burning." The 
following is of interest as bearino* both on 
4 judgement' and on 'fire.' "For penalties are 
" inflicted on those who are ailing to this end 
" that a cure may come after the pain. There- 
fore (i.e., to effect a cure) the world which 
" ' lieth in wickedness ' is burned with Divine fire 
" in the day of judgement, and the bloody city is 
laid upon coals of fire."f — In Ezech. xxi. I 
must also add a pithy utterance of the same 
Father. Speaking of God, he says, "He is fire 
"that He may expel the Devil's cold." — From S. 



t See Is. lxvii. 14-5, quoted by Origen and S. Jerome, where the 
Septuagint has a remarkable reading — "Thou hast coals of fire, sit 
upon them, they will be to thee a help." 



224 THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 

> JkMUB 



Jerome's comment on Hob. ii. I take the 
following — " Illis qnippe in igne deficientibus 
"* * aut diaboli principis sui igne consumptis, 
" aut certe succensis igne Domini de quo ait 
" 4 Ignem veni mettere super terram ' et de 
u priori cursu retractis et agentibus penitentiam, 
" replebitur universa terra Gloria Domini." I 
shall only say further that S. Jerome's com- 
mentaries are full of this teaching, see, e.g., 
his remarks on Mai. iii. 2-3, Hos. iv. 14, xi. 8-9, 
Joel ii. 4, Amos vii. 4, &c, &c. Thus on 
Nahum iii. 13, he speaks of God's wrath as 
u cleansing by means of the fire of Hell 
" (Gehenna)." Again commenting on Obad. i. 
18, S. Jerome says, " This flame shall devour 
" Esau for his salvation, * * so that Esau 
" shall be no more {i.e., as Esau, as evil) at that 
" Day when every knee shall bow to Christ in 
" order that God may be all in all." I add the 
following, though it refers rather to ' death ' than 
to 4 fire.' S. Jerome comments thus on Flab, iii , 
" 4 In the end of the world every created thing 
" (omnis creatura) shall be set free ' (from evil), 
u * * # God' s arrows are sent forth not to 
" slay bat to enlighten. * * * (Spiritual) 
" death was sent to the wicked in order that 
u they who before used to live to sin, being dead 
" to sin, might live to God. * * Christ smites 
" the prince of this world and his abode, i.e., 
" the world and every sinful soul. And He 
u smites for this end in order that the evil being" 



OF FIRE. 



225 



" cast out, it may become the abode of God. 
a And it is worthy so to think of God, who went 
" forth with His Christ * * in order that He 
" might become our head, who is the head of every 
" man and of His Church." Again in a striking 
passage, the same Father speaks of the lapsed, 
and lost Christian soul, as begging God to 
" burn its fleshly parts and open its wounds * * 
" that it may suffer so many torments, and after - 
" wards receive a cure. * * Finally, after 
" tortures and punishments the soul brought forth 
u from the outer darkness, and having paid the 
u very last farthing, says, I shall behold his 
" righteousness. * * Now he who after God's 
" wrath, says that he sees God's righteousness 
" (justification) promises himself the sight of 
" Christ. — In Micah vii. 

To the same effect much might be quoted from 
S. Gregory, of Nyssa. " The evil man will not 
" become a sharer in the divine nature, till the 
" cleansing fire shall have removed the stains 
"mingled with the souV—Orat de mort. 
Elsewhere he says that water and fire have a 
cleansing effect. " They who have not shared 
u the mystical cleansing of water, must be 
"cleansed by fire." — Cat or at. xxxv. In the 
same spirit he writes, that as God's, purpose to 
cleanse from sin the human race, cannot fail, so 
those who are not healed in the present u shall 
u be hereafter cleansed at fitting times by fire." 



226 THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



— Be an. et resurr. And again, " In the same 
" mode, the soul which is united to sin must be 
" set in the fire, till that which is unnatural and 
" vile * * be removed, consumed by the eternal 
"fire." — lb. Here note, S. Gregory distinctly 
teaches that the eternal ( aionios ) fire is temporary 
and purgatorial.^ " This fire," he goes on to say, 
" shall be kindled for a longer or a shorter period, 
" in proportion to the amount of sin needing to 
"be cleansed away." 

There remains for our consideration a very 
important class of passages, supposed, but, as 
I shall hope to show, erroneously, to favour the 
popular creed. These passages — to which I 
would now briefly advert — are those that speak 
of the 'elect,' and their fewness (see p. 6), of the 
1 many ' called, but the ' few ' chosen. That 
God's election is a doctrine clearly revealed in 
Scripture, none can doubt: although, unfortu- 
nately, around few subjects has the battle of 
controversy been so furiously waged. One great 
party has, in affirming God's election — which is 
true — so affirmed it as to make Him into an 
arbitrary and cruel tyrant — which is false. But 
the truer and deeper views of God's plan of 
mercv through Jesus Christ — now in the 
ascendant I trust — teaches us to affirm distinctly 
the doctrine of the Divine election of ' the few,' 



f It is interesting to note that the Latin version of S. Gregory, 
though usually very fair, ,in this instance omits to translate the 
weighty and significant aionios of the original. 



OF ELECTION. 



221 



and just because we so affirm it, to connect with 
it purposes of universal mercy. For what is the 
true end and meaning of God's election when 
rightly understood ? The elect, we reply, are 
chosen, not for themselves only, but for other's 
sake. They are ' elect,' not merely to be blessed, 
but to be a source of blessing. God's choice of 
6 the few ' is not designed to terminate with them. 
It is not merely with the paltry object of saving 
a few, while the vast majority perish, that God 
elects; it is with a Divine purpose, a purpose of 
mercy to all; it is by 'the few' to save 'the 
1 many,' by the elect to save the world. " If you 
"go to Scripture," says Dr. Cox, "you will find 
<; this its constant teaching. Even in those early 
"days when one man, one family, one nation, 
" were successively chosen, to be the depositories 
"of Divine truth, when, therefore, if ever we 
k ' might expect to find the redemptive purpose 
" of God disclosed within narrow and local 
"limitations; when unquestionably it was much 
" fettered and restrained by personal promises, 
" and by national and temporary institutions; the 
" Divine purpose is for ever oversteping every 
" limit, every transient localisation and restraint, 
" and claiming, as its proper sphere, all the souls 
"that are and shall be." This admits of easy 
proof. Take a typical case to show what God's 
election really means. Take the case of 
Abraham, the father and founder of God's elect 
people. What was the promise to him? ' That 



228 



THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



in his seed should all the families of the earth be 
'blessed.' This was of the essence of God's 
election. And to this effect S. Paul speaks 
with perfect clearness. The promise to Abraham 
was, he tells us, that he should be the heir of the 
world, Rom. iv. 13; words most expressive, and 
yet without meaning, on the common view of 
election. In other words the Jews, as God's 
people, have, as their inheritance, all lands, all 
peoples. In the same Epistle (to the Romans) 
S. Paul points out how close the connection is 
between Israel and the world (p.p. 149-50). 
Three times over he asserts their very fall to be 
the riches of the world, and asks if so, what will 
not the reconciling of Israel be (to the world). 
In short, on God's elect people hangs the lot and 
destiny of mankind — see Gal. hi. 8, and Acts hi. 
21-5; the latter passage is very interesting, for S. 
Peter there asserts the connection between a 
universal restoration, and the promise to 
Abraham, i.e., his election. These topics have 
been already touched on in earlier chapters, but 
without again referring to them here, I could not 
have given any clear view of the Divine election 
— as a fact undoubtedly taught in Scripture, and 
yet implying a purpose of mercy to all. A 
further admirable illustration of this may be 
given (furnished by Holy Scripture) from its 
teaching as to the 4 first fruits,' and as to the 
4 first born.' Israel, as God's elect, is the ' first 
' fruits ' — Israel the 'first born.' But the ' first 



OF ELECTION. 



229 



£ fruits' imply and pledge the whole harvest ; the 
'first born' involve and include in the Divine 
economy the whole family fas indeed has been 
said in a former chapter). " The first born and 
" first fruits are the ' few ' and the i little flock;' 
" but these, although 'first delivered from the 
" curse,' have relation to the whole creation, which 
" shall be saved in the appointed times by the 
"first born seed, that is by Christ and His 
"body." It is thus clear that we, so far from 
denying or weakening the election of the few, lay 
stress on it. Rightly viewed, God's electing 
grace stands, not opposed to, but in complete 
agreement with the widest hope for all men. It 
becomes indeed a corner stone, so to speak, in 
the edifice of the world's salvation ; for His ' elect' 
few are the very means by which our Father 
designs to bless all His children — designs to 
work out His plan of universal salvation. 

A few closing remarks are needed here, to 
indicate the principle that is really at stake, in the 
questions this chapter discusses. For that 
principle is vital, and fundamental. It is no less 
than the unity of the Godhead ; no less than the 
first article of the Creed, 4 I believe in one God 
the Father Almighty ' — in God who is one, not in 
nature alone, but in purpose and in will — one and 
unchanging. But in place of this God, the 
popular creed presents us with a Being who 
fluctuates between tenderness and wrath; one 



230 THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE 



who has ever-changing plans, and a will that is 
divided, and baffled. For half His creatures, 
His love is in fact momentary, and His vengeance 
eternal. For the other half, His pity is eternal, 
and His wrath transient. This God is not even 
Lord in His own house ; for the worst and 
feeblest of His creatures can defeat His most 
cherished plan; can paralyze the Cross of Christ. 
In such a God I can see no trace of Him, who is 
Almighty and unchanging, whose property is 
always to have mercy ; whose love, though it must 
take the form of vengeance against sin, never 
ceases to pursue the sinner, for "love never 
"faileth;" never to all eternity. Against the 
popular caricature of God, this chapter is thus a 
special protest — that caricature which represents 
eternal love as turning to hate, as soon as the 
sinner dies; which vainly talks of an Eternal 
Father, whose judgements mean salvation in one 
world, and change to damnation in the next : of 
eternal love, whose fire purifies and refines in 
time, and then beyond the grave turns to mere 
(purposeless) torture. All this is not alone 
morally repulsive, but is a plain contradiction in 
terms. 

Against this mass of contradiction stands the 
view I have been advocating of 'death,' 'judge- 
■ ment,' ' fire,' ' election.' It rests on a principle 
simple and, I believe, quite irrefragible. It rests, 
as I have said, ultimately on the Divine unity — 



OF ELECTION. 



231 



unity of essence, and unity of design. As God is 
one and immutable, so is His purpose of salvation 
one, immutable, and unfailing, " Propositum 
"atque consilium ejus (Dei) hoc unum est," "j* 
says S. Gregory. God's essential unity is 
destroyed when we assign to Him conflicting 
actions; when, e.g., we represent His 'hre," wrath,' 
or judgements as differing in purpose, or in result 
from His love; or fancy that if His judgements 
now mean salvation, they at the Great Day mean 
damnation. God, I repeat, in His 'judgements,' 
in His 'fires,' in 'death,' in 'election;' God in 
time and in eternity is one and the same God (Reb. 
xiii. 8), and has, and must have to all eternity, 
but one unchanging purpose — is and must be for 
ever God our Saviour. Those who are not 
moved by any words of mine may perhaps lay to 
heart the words of one of the most eminent 
Fathers. To sever God's action into love and 
harshness is, says S. Gregory, but madness, 
nay the ' madness of idle babblers P At the bare 
idea that God can be really hard or cruel to His 
enemies (see note on S. Luke vi. 27, p. 134) and 
loving to His friends, the Saint exclaims with a 
scorn (most rare in his writings) — " Oh, the 
" madness of these babblers ! for if God is un- 
" merciful to His foes, He will not be truly kind 
" even to thee His friend." — De orat. 1. 



f I quote the Latin version, which will be generally intelligible. 



CHAPTER X. 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 

;< The little Pilgrim listened with an intent face, clasping her 
"hands and said, ' But it never could be that our Father should be 
" overcome by evil. Is that not known in all the worlds ?' " — The 
Little Pilgrim, p. 122. 

' ' This world is strange and often terrible ; but be not afraid, all 
' ' will come right at last. Rest will conquer Restlessness ; Faith will 
" conquer Fear ; Order will conquer Disorder ; Health will conquer 
4< Sickness; Joy will conquer Sorrow; Pleasure will conquer Pain ; 
" Life will conquer Death ; Right will conquer Wrong. All will be 
" well at last. 1 ' — Madam How and Lady Why — C. Kingsley. 

I shall commence this closing chapter by 
pointing out that the question of universalism is 
usually argued on a basis altogether misleading. 
It is commonly stated as though the point 
involved was chiefly or wholly man's endless 
suffering. Awful and repulsive to every moral 
instinct as is that view of human destiny, it is 
not the real turning point of this controversy. 
The vital question is this, that the popular creed 
teaches an eternity of evil, points to a victorious 
Devil, and to sin as finally triumphant over God. 
Of all this I have spoken, but in this retrospect let 
me again most earnestly press this as the vital 
point, that our choice lies between accepting the 
victory of Christ or of the evil one, and between 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 238 



those alternatives only. Escape from this dilemma 
there is none. It avails nothing to diminish, as 
so many now teach, the number of the lost; or to 
assert as others do, that they will be finally 
annihilated. It cannot be too clearly pointed out, 
that all such modifications leave absolutely 
untouched, the great central difficulty of the 
popular creed — the triumph of evil. Sin 
eternally present with its taint, were it but in a 
single instance, is sin triumphant. Sin, which 
God has been unable to remove (and has had no 
resource but to annihilate the sinner) is sin 
triumphant, and death (emphatically) victorious. 
On these lines, and these only, let this contro- 
versy proceed, and the issue can no longer be 
doubtful. Are we to abandon the Cross as a 
failure, to teach that the Atonement designed to 
save all, has in fact, missed its end? Here lies 
the fundamental issue; is God really Almighty 
as well as All -good: or is evil lodged in our 
perverted will too strong for Him and His 
Christ? Or take the Incarnation, has the 
second Adam done less of good for man, than 
the first has of evil ? Is the Bible mocking us 
in saying that " as in Adam all die, so in 
" Christ shall all be made alive?" To say this 
is to deny the central truth of the Incarnation, 
which is the taking of the race as a whole into 
union with God, exactly as the fall embraced the 
race as a whole. Thus, the ordinary creed and 
all its various modifications* now so popular, 



234 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



virtually subvert the Atonement ; and reject the 
Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ, for an 
Atonement that has missed its end is not the 
Atonement of the Bible — an Incarnation that 
fails in fact to embrace the human race, as an 
organic undivided whole, is not the Incarnation 
of Jesus Christ as the second Adam. 

Too often, again, is the Scriptural argument 
for the larger hope stated as though it were 
weak. No greater mistake can be made. Those 
who have reason to shrink from an appeal to the 
Scriptures are not universalists, but are the 
advocates of endless sin! of a baffled Saviour! 
of a victorious Devil ! It is they who shut their 
eyes to the teaching of the Bible. It is they 
who make light of its repeated promises of a 
restitution of all things through Christ. It is 
they who make God's word of none effect by 
their traditions. The notion, which is in fact 
that of the popular creed, viz., that God is in the 
Bible detailing the story of His own defeat — is 
telling how sin has proved too strong for Him ; 
this notion is worse than absurd. Eo ! assuredly 
the Bible is not the story of sin, deepening into 
eternal ruin — of creation, darkened for ever by a 
ghastly Hell — of God's own Son, worsted in His 
utmost effort; it is from the opening to the close 
the story of grace stronger than sin — of life 
victorious over every form of death — of God 
triumphing over evil. 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 285 



And next let me once more (see p. 20) 
repeat that the larger hope emphatically 
and fully accepts the doctrine of retribution 
awaiting unrepented sin hereafter. Its advocates 
believe in a retribution stern and unflinching, 
and prolonged till the stubborn will yields to the 
stronger will of God and His Christ ; till He 
who has been lifted up on the Cross shall have 
drawn to Himself all men, as He so plainly 
promises. Those who picture universalism as 
some easy-going system, which refuses to face the 
stern facts of sin and misery and retribution, 
are absolutely and hopelessly wrong. We 
press on all the awful certainty of a wrath to 
come. Nay, we can urge this with infinitely 
more chance of acceptance, because we teach 
retribution in a form that does not wound the 
conscience ; because we dare not teach that 
"finite sin shall receive an infinite penalty ; or that 
evil in any form is too strong for the Cross of 
Christ to overcome. 

And as the larger hope leads us to affirm, and 
emphasise the teaching of Scripture as to the 
guilt of actual sin and its certain punishment, so 
it teaches us to give prominence to the fact of 
original sin. For in this it sees a clear proof of 
a fundamental doctrine of Scripture, the organic 
unity of our race — a doctrine lying at the root of 
the Fall and the Incarnation. Each infant born 
into a state of sin is a witness to its truth, and 



236 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



bears in its whole life sad proof of the organic 
unity of our race, in the taint drawn from our 
first parent Adam. But this unity is to be traced, 
not alone in the tie connecting us with the first 
Adam, but as truly in the bond which unites us 
with the second Adam. In words admitted — 
this is in fact denied by the popular creed — 
but once admitted as a vital fact, it follows 
necessarily that Christ's relation is not to men 
singly, but to man, i.e., mankind. Therefore, 
the salvation which He brings is not (cannot 
be) a thing of individuals, but of all. There- 
fore, a partial salvation is not possible, for Christ 
redeems, not individual men, but mankind ; not 
human beings severally, but humanity. Christ 
has nothing to do with a part of our race. As 
the second Adam, He sums up in Himself and 
saves the human race, " For as in Adam all die, 
" so in (the second) Adam shall all be made 
" alive." Christ, I repeat, in His Incarnation 
deals not with the units of our race, but with the 
race itself as the unit. On the popular view it is 
impossible to conceive how the Incarnation can 
be really maintained or really believed, for that 
view stands in a position of hopeless contradic- 
tion to Christ as the second Adam. Hence the 
popular creed deals a fatal blow at the 
Incarnation. 

Few things, I repeat, have so hindered the spread 
of the larger hope, as the groundless notion, that 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



it implies an inadequate sense of sin, and 
pictures God as a weakly indulgent Being, 
careless of holiness, provided the happiness of His 
creatures is secured. But in fact it is those who 
teach the popular creed, and not we, who make light 
of sin. I press once more this point. To teach 
unending sin in Hell, were it only in a solitary 
instance, and under any conceivable modifica- 
tion or mitigation, is to teach at once the victory 
of evil, and the toleration of sin by God? To us 
this seems at once a blasphemy and a folly — 
a blasphemy because it imputes to God acqui- 
escence in sin, which He can destroy if He will; a 
folly because it teaches that His omnipotence 
breaks down at the very moment it is most needed. 
And here we may perhaps ask, can any light, 
however small, be thrown on this awful mystery 
of sin ? For all practical purposes, I reply there 
are but two possible views of moral evil. It is 
eternal, destined to endure as long as God Him- 
self, which is in fact Dualism ; * or it is 
temporary and finite, not rooted in the essential 
constitution of nature, but in God's mysterious 
plan permitted only to serve a higher end. f On 



* May it not be said a peculiarly evil form of Dualism, for in it 
the good Spirit knowingly and freely permits of His own will the 
entrance of evil, which He knows will endure eternally ? 

t It deserves notice that this view of moral evil is substantially 
that of Thomas Aquinas ; "he makes the elevation of the creature 
"above the original capabilities of his nature, to depend on the 
"introduction of sin. — Neander viii. 216. 



238 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



this view it is a stage in the development of the 
creature, and of this there seems a hint conveyed 
in the story of the first sin. By it man is said 
to have 4 become as one of us,' as though the very 
Fall implied a Rise. And what but this idea can 
adequately express the meaning of that most me- 
morable passage, " God hath shut up all men unto 
" disobedience, in order that he might have mercy 
" upon allV Note here the stress boldly laid (i.)on 
God's agency and not on maris will, (ii.) The 
universality alike of sin and of salvation, both are 
equally absolute, effectual, universal, (hi.) Sin 
is permitted only as leading up to as involving 
salvation. And in conformity with this view we 
see not an arrangement by which man starts 
innocent in the race of life, free to choose sin or 
not, but an express provision for the hereditary 
transmission of evil; by which innocence is 
rendered impossible to every human being; by 
which every child of Adam is, in the Divine plan, 
i shut up unto (sin) disobedience, 1 an arrangement 
wholly inconceivable on the part of a good and 
loving Father, except with a settled purpose of 
mercy to every one. 

Further, if it be asked whether the evil effects 
of wilful sin ever wholly pass away, it may be 
replied, probably never in some cases. Certainly 
some ' enter into life halt and maimed.' Obsti- 
nate persistency in sin may leave on the spirit a 
wound whose evil effects are permanent. Two 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 239 



results of this fact deserve notice, i. It answers 
the plausible taunt cast at the larger hope as 
leading the careless to say, " if this be true I will 
" have my fling, for all will come ' right at last.' " 
Is this so ? Yes, in one sense. N~o, in another. 
Yes, because such men do ' enter into life' though 
after long years (or ages) of penalty and dark- 
ness. No, because they enter halt and maimed 
spiritually, ii. May not this furnish a meeting 
place for reasonable men on both sides? For 
final and universal restoration is not opposed to 
perpetual penalty in a certain sense ; because the 
wilful sinner, though saved, may yet suffer a 
perpetual loss, a poena damni, loss of the highest 
spiritual blessedness hereafter. 

Again of the selfishness that blackens the ordi- 
nary creed I have already spoken. So often is this 
overlooked that I press the point here. What shall 
we say of a system whose very heaven is degrada- 
tion, whose idea of blessedness is moral baseness 
or moral torpor ? For what does the ordinary view 
in fact teach ? it bids us look forward to a heaven 
from which our friends, our neighbours, our 
wives, our brothers, our sisters, are (very many 
of them) excluded for ever, shut up in agony 
while we enjoy the delights of Paradise ; we 
exult, but they agonise ; we are in bliss, they 
are in torment, while we either know not, or 
knowing, care not for their woe. If this be not 
selfishness at its height, what is selfishness ? 



240 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



If it be not baseness, what is baseness ? 
It is to make the blessed in Heaven more 
degraded morally than Dives in his torment. 
To this difficulty, no answer has ever been given 
by the popular creed, except one which makes 
the difficulty far, far worse (p. 42), viz., that the 
blessed delight in contemplating the torments 
of the lost. But no answer is in fact possible. 

A few words I must add on the disregard 
for truth that taints the ordinary creed. I 
do not mean wilful untruth, but I do mean 
that virtual falsehood stains almost the whole 
body of our religious literature ; alike in its 
gravest and most elaborate treatises, as in 
its lighter forms. Falsehood is to say one thing, 
while meaning another. Hence, to assert that 
the world is saved, while meaning that in fact 
half the world will be damned ; to teach the 
victory of Christ, while meaning in fact the 
victory of the Devil : to do this in a thousand 
forms, in hymns (see p.p. 63-5), in sermons, tracts, 
treatises, is virtual falsehood; and with such false- 
hood, our religious literature is, I repeat, literally 
honey-combed through and through. In God's 
name, I say let this system of equivocation come 
to an end. Let us cease these virtual untruths, 
however true it may be, that long habit has 
blinded us to their real nature ; cease to speak 
of Christ as saving the world, unless we believe 
that in fact the world will be saved ; cease to 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 241 



talk of the destruction of sin and death, while 
we really mean that both will, in fact, go on for 
ever in Hell. Let us no more palter with truth 
in this awful matter ; Christ is victor, or He is 
not. He has put away death and sin and pain 
in fact, or he has not. If He has only tried 'to 
save the world and failed utterly, let us, as 
honest men, say so — as honest men, proclaim as 
our creed the victory of Satan. 

But so long as the popular creed and the Bible 
are held together, so long must this system of 
untruth continue. We pray to ' our Father,' to 
whom in the next breath we assign acts towards 
His own children, more cruel than any the most 
debased earthly parent ever dreamed of. What 
is this but to degrade the Godhead below, far 
below, the level of our humanity ? What is left 
for us to worship if the truth be a lie — if love 
essential be cruelty itself — if God be that which 
I dare not write? But there is more to be said. 
Having thus degraded to the very uttermost the 
idea of Cod, the popular creed goes on to assure 
us of His tenderness that never wearies — His 
love that never fails. What cruel mockery is 
this, coming, as it does, from those who really 
mean, that this unfailing eternal love watches to all 
eternity, unmoved and unsympathising the never- 
ending agonies of His own children. Few things, 
indeed, illustrate more completely the collapse of 
the popular creed than the apologies offered for 



242 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



it. Take an instance. A favourite plea with 
many is to avoid a direct defence, but to take 
shelter under the phrase, ' God will do His best 
4 for every man ' — (p. 19). If this ambiguous 
phrase be offered as a defence for endless sin and 
torment, I can only suppose it meant not as 
an argument, but as a grim, and ill-timed 
piece of pleasantry. For what are the admitted 
facts ? An Almighty Being, who is perfectly 
free to create or to abstain from creating, forces 
on myriads of hapless children of His own the 
fatal gift of existence, knowing that in fact this 
life of theirs will ripen into endless misery and 
woe. To call this doing His best for them is an 
abuse of language, if it be not what I have 
ventured to call a cruel and ill-timed pleasantry. 

These are but a few of the reasons which show 
how impossible it is to reconcile the belief in endl ess 
torment, with the plain and unmistakeable con- 
victions of our moral nature — God's highest gift 
to us. Few things are more wonderful in this 
whole question than the reluctance so many feel, 
to follow out these unhesitating convictions to 
their only possible legitimate conclusion — -the 
rejection of that dogma, which so flatly contradicts 
them. It is not intended for a moment to assert, 
that these convictions are an absolutely infallible 
guide; for indeed of what can it be said, that its 
directions reach us in an infallible form ? Can 
that be said of the Bible itself ? Are those who 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



24S 



translate it infallible ? Are those who comment 
on it infallible ? Are those who read it free from 
error, from prejudice, from ignorance ? But no 
one, therefore, doubts its Divine authority, or 
fails to see in it a guide practically sufficient, and 
binding on us. Exactly so in the case of that 
other, and primary, revelation of God to the heart 
and conscience of man. Although we do not 
claim infallibility for all its conclusions, yet we 
do claim that the deliberate verdict of our moral 
sense represents to us the voice of God practically. 
And therefore that which contradicts our deepest 
moral intuitions, convictions, instincts (call them 
what you please), cannot be true. Nay, by these 
very convictions, and by these alone, it is, that 
life is ordered, that society subsists, that religion 
itself becomes possible. Now this being so, we 
cannot dare, as the popular creed does, to attribute 
to our Creator acts, which we know and feel 
would be utterly cruel and horrible in an earthly 
parent. It is a blasphemy against our Maker 
so to do, it is doubly a blasphemy against Him 
who is "our Father." 

I say farther, that the evil wrought by the 
ordinary creed is enormous. It has done, 
and is daily doing, more to spread and harden 
unbelief than all other causes put together. 
It enlists on the side of scepticism, the highest 
and best part of our nature, its moral forces. It 
has turned God into a fiend and a tyrant, cruel 
beyond imagination's wildest dreams of evil. It 



244 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



has made of our dear Lord's Cross a bye-word 
and a mark for scorn: as attempting to save the 
world and recoiling defeated — the most awful 
failure known to history, or conceivable by 
thought. To a number so vast that I dare not 
attempt any computation, it has made life an 
agony and a curse. And whom has it benefited? 
Let me cite some remarkable words detailing 20 
years' experience, as a Roman Catholic priest, and 
confessor to thousands. " The dogma of Hell, 
"except in the rarest cases, did no moral good. 
" It never affected the right persons. It tortured 
" innocent young women, and virtuous boys. It 
" appealed to the lowest motives, and the lowest 
u characters. It never, except in the rarest 
" instances, deterred from, the commission of sin. 
"It caused unceasing mental and moral 
" difficulties. * * It always influenced the 
" wrong people, and in a wrong way. It caused 
" infidelity to some, temptations to others, and 
" misery without virtue to most." — E. Suffield. 
Nor is this all. I have pointed out how this 
creed hinders the spread of the Gospel abroad. 
As the missionary unfolds his tale of horrors, 
the very heathen shrink from the mockery of 
calling such a prospect any part of the tidings 
of great joy. 

An important point has been discussed 
(p.p. 23-4), viz., the attempt made to remove 
the overwhelming moral difficulties attending 
the popular creed, by asserting that endless 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 245 



torments are but the result of the human 
will freely choosing evil;* so that as the phrase is 
sometimes put, the doors of Hell are " locked on 
"the inside." I have shown how this assertion 
(1.) contradicts the plain teaching of Holy 
Scripture, (ii.) contradicts the very idea of 
Redemption, (hi.) denies God's freedom, (iv.) con- 
tradicts itself, and hence cannot be true. Thus 
the real difficulties are not so much as touched by 
any such theory. The intellectual difficulty 
remains the same, for the Almighty is thus 
defeated; the Scriptural difficulty remains the 
same, for its promises of universal restitution 
come to naught; and the moral difficulty is 
untouched, for the final victory remains with 
the powers of darkness on this view. 

Of the Incarnation I have spoken, but I must 
add a few words on this special point, its in- 
fluence on the whole chain of Christian dogma. 
It is the great fact of Christianity. From it 
flow, and on it depend the Atonement, the 
Sacramental system, the Resurrection; they are, 
as it were, results of the Incarnation, and 
extensions of it. Now the Incarnation involves 
the idea of the unity, absolute and indivisible, of 



* It is worth noting that the Patristic teachers (e.g., Origetst and 
Clement) of the larger hope, are usually strong advocates of free 
will, and indeed, base their teaching in part, on this very fact (see 
also the extract from Titus, of Bostra, p. 89, and one from S. 
Gregory, ofNyssa, on p. 90-1). 



246 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



the race of man.* "For what purpose is the 
" history of our race traced to its earliest origin * * 
" unless its fortunes were regarded as a whole, 
" and it must stand or fall together?"^ — Wither force 
on the Incarnation. " To that old creation is 
" opposed the regeneration of man's race, through 
" its new creation in the second Adam." — lb. 
p. 538. " And so the seed of life, sown in the 
" Incarnation, interpenetrates the whole nature of 
"mankind." — lb. 421. "Christ, the second 
Adam, represents, not the individual, hut the 
human race." — Lightfoot, on Phil. ii. 7. But this 
involves the salvation of the race, " which stands 
" or falls together." And hence it is that in the 
Atonement, all (i.e., the race of man, our collective 
humanity) are said in Scripture, to die with 
Jesus Christ. — 2 Cor. v. 14. And hence, 
again, He must, as the Second Adam, draw all 
men unto Himself by His Cross. It is, to 
borrow a homely phrase, all or none. Thus, 
the Atonement involves the larger hope. 

Let us pass to the Sacraments. They are an 
extension of the Incarnation. " The influence 
"of the Incarnation extends itself through that 



* I do not stop to illustrate this by the facts of heredity, &c. It 
is enough to say that God's idea or plan pre-supposes an indivisible 
unity of the race, and this involves universalism. 

f These statements from the pen of one who teaches, that a part 
of the human race is severed for ever from the Second Adam, are 
remarkable. They illustrate what has just been said (p. 240) of the 
virtual untruth which runs through our traditional theology. 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 241 



" Sacramental system, which binds all men to the 
"head of the race."— Wilberforce, p. 14. "As 
" there is a recapitulation of all, in Heaven and 
" earth in Christ, so there is a recapitulation of 
"all in Christ in the Holy Sacrament." — Bishop 
A ndrews Sermon of the Nativity. In the language 
of theology the tie formed in Baptism (renewed in 
Holy Communion) with Christ is so close, that in 
the famous words of S. Leo, " Corpus reqenerati 
" fit caro Christi" " The body of the baptised 
" becomes the flesh of Jesus Christ" But if so, 
it is impossible to believe that the very flesh of 
Christ can be sent into an endless Hell. Can 
Jesus Christ cut off, so to speak, His own flesh 
and sever it from Himself for ever? or rather, to 
state the case fully, can Christ assign a portion 
of Himself to the society of Devils for ever? 
Is this at all credible? It is of very great 
interest to note how one like Keble seemc to 
feel this. When dwelling on these aspects of 
Redemption, the cruel theology to which he 
clings drops off ; and rising to true catholicity, he 
bids us view " Christ's least and worst with hope 
"to meet above," and says in suggestive words 
" Chrisfs mark outwears the rankest blot.'''' 
Need I again (p. 81-2) point out how these 
words involve universalism, for our Lord always 
teaches that those who have been brought nearest 
to Him and yet disobey, as do impenitent 
Christians, will fare worse in the final judgement 
than those who have never heard of Him. 



248 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



Lastly, let us pursue the Incarnation into another 
field of thought, and contemplate in its light the 
general Resurrection. " As in Adam all die, so 
" in Christ shall all be made alive.' ' Why is the 
obvious significance of these words lost sight of ? 
To a universal death in Adam is opposed a 
universal life in Christ, to a fall, a rising again, 
to a loss, a gain, and that universal and absolute. 
And so S. Paul teaches as an object of hope, the 
resurrection of the unjust (p. 145), and his entire 
tone of thought in 1 Cor. xv., implies that the 
Resurrection is always, and to all, victory. Could 
he have thus written in a tone of exaltation so 
absolutely unbroken, if the Resurrection were for 
any the prelude to, I will not say endless woe, but 
to endless sin? It is the undoing of death 
and all that death involves. It is the gift of life 
and immortality, and all. that life involves. If the 
striking words of Theodore, of Mopsuestia 
(p. 95), fail to impress any, let me point to 
Theophilus, of Antioch (p. 84), to Theodoret 
(p. 95), to S. Gregory (pp. 85,96, 145), as teaching 
emphatically this view of the Resurrection. 
Further, this Father says, " First of all we must 
" surely consider what is the meaning fscopos) of 
" the doctrine of the Resurrection.* * The Resur- 
" rection is the restoration of our nature to its 
"pristine state." — Be an. et Resnrr. " Therefore, 
" like a potter's vase, man is resolved once more 
" into clay, in order that (the defilements now 
"adhering to him being separated,) he may be 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



249 



" moulded anew into his original form, by the 
" Resurrection" — Cat orat. c. viii. " Seeing that 
" our nature was originally formed as a vessel 
" capable of good, * * but good did not keep its 
" place, therefore, lest sin adhering to us should 
" last for ever, the vessel is, by a kindly providence, 
" dissolved for a time, in order that * * mankind 
" should be re- moulded and restored, free from the 
"admixture of sin, to its former state. For that 
" is the Resurrection, namely, the replacing of 
"our nature in its former state." — In fun. 
Pulch. orat. 

From S. Ambeose I take the following : " A 
"remedy (for the Fall) was discovered, namely, 
" that man should die and rise again. * * Now 
" in order that the grace of God might abide for 
" ever, Man died ; but Christ brought in the 
" Resurrection in order that he might renew the 
" heavenly gift (of life). Death is an end of sin 
" (p. 93), and Resurrection is a remoulding of 
" our nature" — De Sacr. ii. vi. S. Hilary 
speaks thus : " When the only begotten Son 
" was about to reconcile to God all things in 
" heaven, and on earth ; * * when in Him all 
" powers adverse to God were to be overcome ; 
" when death * * should come to an end * * by 
" redeeming man from the law of sin— by making 
" God an object of praise to all, and through all 
" the eternities, by the gift and dignity of our 
"immortality. Now all these things the virtue 



250 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



" of the Resurrection accomplished.'''' — In Ps. lxviii. 
Theodoret puts well the connection between 
the Resurrection of all and the Restoration of all. 
" S. Paul asserting that 1 the last enemy to be 
" destroyed is death,' and that- ' He hath put all 
''things under Christ's feet,' adds finally l in 
"order that God may be All in AlV * * In the 
" present life God is in all, for His nature is with- 
" out limits * * But in the future, when (by the 
" Resurrection) mortality is at an end and 
" immortality granted, and (consequently) sin 
" has no longer any place, God will be All in 
"All:"— In Eph. i. 23. "For Christ has 
"wholly destroyed the power of sin by His 
" promise of immortality ; for it (sin) cannot 
"trouble immortal bodies." — In Ileb. ix. 25. 
" For after the Resurrection, when our bodies 
" become incorruptible and immortal, grace shall 
" reign in them, sin having no place left for it. 
"For when sufferings fpathonj are put an end 
" to (by the Resurrection), sin will have no place." 
In Rom. v. 21. Viewed thus, surely a clearer light 
falls on the Saviour's words, " I am the 
" Resurrection and the Life," words which the 
Catholic creeds re-echo so suggestively, "I 
"believe in * * the Resurrection of the dead and 
" the Life everlasting" — the Resurrection as brinor- 
ing to all life everlasting; the Life everlasting 
as linked with the Resurrection. 

I come next to remark on the Patristic evidence 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 251 



already quoted here, for the due understanding 
of which chapter iv. should be compared with 
chapter ix., sections on 'death,' 'judgement/ and 
'fire.' Doubtless opinions will differ as to the 
weight due to the Fathers; but even viewed as a 
mere fact of history, the existence in the early 
centuries of a school so numerous, so orthodox 
and teaching so extreme a form of universalism, 
is in a high degree significant. This significance 
is only seen in its true light when we remember 
that universalism found its ablest advocates in 
those great Fathers whose native tongue was 
that of the New Testament; and bear in mind 
further what the position of the Church was, in 
fact, for the first three centuries, (a.) It was 
enora^ed in a struggle almost for life and death, 
and that with (b.) a heathenism — cruel, lustful, 
and abominable, beyond our present powers to 
conceive ; (c) nor must we forget the doctrine of 
Economy or Reserve held by most of the Fathers. 
To find so many teaching under these circumstances 
the larger hope, promising openly a share — 
however remote or small — in future blessedness, 
to the blasphemer, the cruel persecutor, the 
votary of nameless lusts, though unrepentant in 
this life, is really wonderful. Such teaching 
must have seemed something like treason to the 
struggling Church, a blow aimed at the dearest 
interests of the Gospel. Such teaching can only 
be accounted for by the deepest and profoundest 
conviction that it was a vital truth — an essential 



252 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 



part of the Gospel. Let us, therefore, cease to 
wonder at occasional inconsistency — real or 
apparent — in the language of the Fathers who 
teach universalism. The truth is that the fact 
that any were found to teach it is irresistible proof, 
that it formed so vital a part of Christianity that 
they dared not teach otherwise. Further we have 
seen how the attempt to procure a condemnation 
of this belief in the case of Origen signally failed, 
and how in fact no general council has ever 
condemned it, thus leaving it, so far as the 
Church is concerned, a perfectly open question. 
Nor have we omitted to remark how the two 
Ancient Creeds — the Apostles' and the Nicene — 
close their statements of Christian truth by the 
assertion of a belief in the life to come, and are 
significantly silent as to anything more than this. 
In our Book of Common Prayer again, fashioned 
as it is on the old lines, not a few passages have 
been noticed that imply the larger hope, and teach 
more or less directly the salvation of all men. 

A brief digression here will enable me at once to illustrate 
clearly the doctrine of Reserve, and to add to our list of 
early universalists, S. Hilary, 360 A.D., a very eminent 
Father. Commenting on P.s-. xv. 2, " And speaketh the 
l£ truth in his heart," this Father, after enforcing the duty of 
truth, proceeds thus, " But this is difficult by reason of the 
" sins and vices of the age. For a lie is very often — plerum- 
" que — necessiry, and sometimes falsehood is useful; as 
" when we tell a lie to an assassin lying in wait, or upset 
" evidence on behalf of one who is in danger, or deceive a 
" sick man as to the difficulty of cure ; and as the Apostle 
" teaches, our words should be seasoned with salt. There- 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 



253 



" fore it is that here the Hoi y Spirit has tempered the character 
" of falsehood by shewing what are the conditions of lying (has 
" shewn what a lie really is ; has, in fact, permitted a lie 
" under certain conditions), saying, as Origen might, ' He 
" that slandereth not with his tongue, nor doeth evil to his 
" friend,' (shewing) that the guilt of lying is in the hurt 
"done to a neighbour. I append the original sentence 
" ' Spiritus Sanctus falsitatis affectum mendacii conditionibus 
" temperavit, Origenianum dicens * * ut crimen mendacii 
" in incommodo haberetur alieno.'" These words may be 
fairly said to authorise lying, where lying is deemed useful 
or the truth hurtful. We can thus never be certain that 
any Father holding fas almost all did) the doctrine of 
Reserve, really disbelieves the larger hope, because he 
denies it in words. He may deny it and yet at heart firmly 
believe it. But a more frequent case, and one of greater 
interest is. where the Fathers use on this subject inconsistent 
language. Here, T think, no doubt can reasonably arise 
as to the propriety of claiming such Fathers as really 
holding universalism. These Fathers were acute and keen 
reasoners, weighing well each word. No hypothesis other 
than belief in its truth, can reasonably account for language 
teaching universalism, while passages contradictory of it 
are at once explained by the doctrine of Reserve. There- 
fore I claim S. Hilary (though he teaches at times an 
opposite doctrine) as in heart an advocate of the larger hope. 
One such passage has just been given (page 249). I add two 
others. Commenting on the parable of the one sheep lost 
out of ninetv and nine, he says, " This one sheep is man, 
" and by one man the entire rare is to be understood * * the 
" ninety and nine are the heavenly angels, * * and by us 
" (mankind) who all are one (see p. 236) the number of the 
" heavenly church is to be filled up And therefore it is 
"that every creature awaits the revelation of the sons 
"of God." — In S. Matt. c. xviii. This extract teaches 
universalism plainly. The whole human race, who are one, 
are the one lost sheep, which is destined to be found by 
the Good Shepherd. Again, S. Hilary has a long and 



254 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



interesting comment on Ps. ii. 8-9, pervaded by the larger 
hope. In giving to Christ the ends of the earth as his 
possession is meant, he says, a dominion, absolute!?/ universal, 
one to be summed up in S. Paul's words, which teach " That 
" every knee of things in heaven and earth and under the 
" earth are to bend in Jesus's name " (a passage very dear 
to the early universalists). And as to the nature of this 
supremacy over all, S. Hilary proceeds to say that by 
Christ's u ruling the nations with a rod of iron " is indeed 
meant the care of the Good Shepherd ; and by " breaking 
" them in pieces like a potter's vessel " is really signified 
the vessel's restoration. " In this way God will bruise and 
"break the nations of His inheritance, so as to reform 
" them." A.nd the breaking of the vessel, he says, takes 
place " When the body, being dissolved by death, and thus 
"broken up, the restoration shall be effected by the 
"artificer's will." These words recall some extracts given 
on pp. 84-5. But the original text of S. Hilary, of which 
I have given the merest summary, is very suggestive, and 
its universalistic drift is unmistakeable. Other passages of 
similar tone occur in Be Trin. Lib. ii., and again Lib. xi., 
and in comments on Ps. cxliii. and lxviii. 

From the Church we turned to consider the 
all-important question of the teaching of Holy 
Scripture. I have pointed out how, even in the 
Old Testament, there are intimations from the 
very first of a future blessing, designed to em- 
brace all the race of man. These intimations 
become more and more distinct as the plan of 
God is more fully disclosed, and both Psalmists 
and Prophets unite in their promises of a golden 
age yet to come, when the knowledge of the Lord 
shall cover the earth as the waters cover the sea. 
The New Testament received more minute atten- 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



255 



tion, due to its supreme importance. The 
passages — at least the more important ones — 
supposed generally to teach the popular creed, 
have been carefully considered, and we have seen 
reason to conclude that they, one and all, while 
emphatically warning sinners of the wrath to 
come, teach nowhere an endless punishment, 
nowhere an unending Hell. 

Next, I have dwelt on this, surely, very 
suggestive fact, that in not a few cases the 
very arguments from Scripture, alleged in 
favour of the popular creed do, in fact, when 
fairly understood, teach the reverse. Thus 
you remember how a chapter was devoted to a 
brief discussion of certain classes of texts, usually 
quoted in. favour of the popular belief, e.g., those 
speaking of God's ' election of the few,' of 
4 death,' of 'judgement,' of 'fire,' of 'the ages.' 
I have attempted to show that the true teaching 
of Holy Scripture on all these points is in abso- 
lute harmony with the larger hope ; that to insist 
on one and all of these points is but to bring into 
clearer relief the doctrine of universal salvation. 
But our examination of the New Testament has 
not been confined to the general points just 
referred to. Two chapters, vi. and vii. have been 
devoted to a series of notes, designedly brief and 
simple, pointing out how full the New Testament 
is of passages (alas, neglected or explained away), 
and yet distinctly teaching or implying the final 



256 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



salvation of all men. So deeply important is this 
evidence furnished by the New Testament in 
favour of a universal salvation, that I venture 
here to append a brief summary of the passages 
already quoted. 

In chapter vi., the evidence furnished by the 
writings of the Evangelists has been considered. 
Let me point out how clear it is, how emphatic. 
Thus we have seen how to Christ is assigned a 
kingdom absolutely without bound or limit ; * 
how all flesh are to see the salvation He gives. You 
have read how the leaven of His Kingdom must 
work on until the ivhole is leavened, and the 
Good Shepherd seek on, till each sheep He has lost 
is found. You have read how the Son of Man 
came to seek and save, not some of the lost, but 
simply "that which was lost," i.e., simply "the 
" lost." His mission is again described as having, 
as its object, the salvation of the world, and He 
is said to take away the sin of the whole world. 
Do these terms fairly represent a partial salvation, 
are they honestly consistent with it ? Again, it 
is said that all things have been given to the Son, 
and that all that is so given shall come to Him. 
He is repeatedly described as the Saviour of the 
world — which yet He does not in fact save on 
the popular view — as the Light of the world. 



* The passages alluded to, in these and the following paragraphs, 
have been already given at length in chapters vi.-vii. 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



257 



He is said not to offer but to give life to the 
world ; a totally different thing ! He says (no 
words can be more absolute), speaking of His 
Cross, that He will draw all men unto Himsele. 
He adds, that He came not to judge, but to save 
the world. All these passages are familiar: true, 
but can you possibly, on any fair theory of the 
meaning of human language, reconcile them with 
the horrors of endless sin, or with a partial 
salvation ? If the sin of the ivhole world be 
taken away, how shall there be a Hell for its 
endless punishment ? If all things without 
exception (the original is the widest possible) 
are given to Christ, and all so given to Him 
shall come to Him, can you reconcile this with 
unending misery ? But let us go on: we find 
language over and over again employed by the 
Evangelists, quite as strong and as decisive against 
the popular creed as that just quoted. When, 
for instance, we read in 8. John how God's Son 
was manifested for the very purpose of sweeping 
away the ivorks of the Devil ; is that consistent 
by any possibility with the preserving these 
works in Hell ? Is there no significance in 
Christ's telling us that He is " alive unto the 
"ages, and has the keys of Hell and death ?" 
Or again, what does the promise to make all 
things new mean ? If this be not a promise of 
universal restoration, what is it ? A^ain, 
remember the promise that there shall be no more 
curse, and no more pain. Lastly, ponder over 



258 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



the glorious vision of the Apocalypse, where every 
creature in Heaven, on earth, and under the 
earth, is described as joining in the song of praise 
to God and to the Lamb ; and ask yourself if less 
than a universal salvation can possibly satisfy the 
plain sense of these words of Scripture. Such 
are some passages already quoted (see chapter 
vi.) ; and yet these are by no means the whole of 
the evidence the JN ew Testament furnishes. We 
have next to consider a very large body of fresh 
passages, quite as distinctly teaching the same 
truth, furnished by the Epistles of S. Paul, S. 
Peter, and that to the Hebrews (see chapter vii). 

S. Paul's Epistles especially are full of the 
most glowing anticipations of the universal reign 
of Christ, and the assured triumph of His King- 
dom over all evil and sin. Thus Abraham is to 
receive the world, and no less, as His portion, 
i.e., in God's elect seed all are to be saved. 
Whatever the Fall has done to injure man is to 
be repaired, and much more than repaired, by the 
gift of God's grace in Christ. But is it possible 
to undo all that sin has done if a single soid * 



* "If but one soul were to remain in the power of the Devil, 
' ' Death, or Hell, to all endless eternity, * * then the Devil, Death, 
" and Hell would have something to boast of against God ; * * and 
' ' thus Death would not be entirely swallowed up in victory, but 
" always keep something of his sting, and Hell would ever more be 
' ' able to make a scorn of those who would say, 1 0 Hell where is thy 
" victory?' "— The Everlasting Gospel— Paul Siegvolck, 1753. 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 



259 



be left in endless loss ? would not S. Paul be in 
fact speaking untruly in such a case ? Further, 
the same Apostle assures us that the whole 
creation shall be delivered into the glorious liberty 
of God's children. And again he argues that 
the very fact of God's giving His Son proves 
that with Him all things are given — the original 
word is the widest possible, and certainly 
includes all souls. Again, all Israel are to be 
saved (and Israel's salvation is that of the world, 
see p. 149), for, adds the Apostle, God's gifts and 
calling are indefeasible — words significant in the 
highest degree, for what is the popular creed but 
an emphatic assertion that God's gifts can be set at 
naught ? And what S. Paul here asserts is 
echoed in the Epistle to the Hebrews, which 
assures us of the immutability of God's counsel. 
Again, has God shut up all in unbelief, it is, S. 
Paul says, that He may have mercy upon all. 
Does £ alV mean • some ' in the latter clause, and 
not in the former here ? 

Once more, the same Apostle assures us — and 
mark these words, for they are surely conclusive 
— that if the first Adam brings death universal lv, 
then the second Adam is to bring universal life. 
If sin abounds, much more shall grace abound. 
Weigh these words well, for in savins: that the 
second Adam has in fact failed in myriads of 
cases to undo the evil caused by the Fall, you 
are giving these words of Scripture the flattest 



260 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



contradiction that it is possible to give. Then as 
to Christ's empire, the Apostle says it must 
extend universally, that to Him every knee must 
bow — " All creation, all things, whatsoever and 
" wheresoever they be. 11 — Lightfoot on Phil. ii. 10 
— and every tongue confess; that one day — at 
the end — God shall be all in all. In fact S. 
Paul never seems to weary of claiming this 
universal dominion for Christ. All things are 
to be gathered together in one in Christ (not in 
Hell surely !) words repeated even more em- 
phatically when the Apostle asserts that by the 
blood of the Cross, all things have been reconciled 
unto the Father. Does the reconciliation of all 
things, i.e., the universe, by the Cross mean the 
sending of countless myriads to endless pain ? 
Further, the Apostle assures us that the living 
God is the Saviour of all, that Jesus Christ has 
abolished death, that the grace of God bringeth 
salvation to all men. Are these statements 
consistent with a partial salvation ? 

S. Peter, too, speaks to the same effect. 
He tells the wonderful story of Christ preach- 
ing to the dead, who had once been dis- 
obedient and were apparently lost; a story 
whose significance is the very greatest possible, 
as indicating how behind the veil Christ works 
on to heal and to save : and in his second Epistle 
adds, that the Lord is not willing that any should 
perish. Is God's deliberate counsel — such is the 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 261 



original word — to come to nothing? Then in 
the Epistle to the Hebrews we have some remark- 
able testimony to the same effect. Thus we have 
there repeated the assertion that all things are to 
be put under Christ ; that His object in dying 
was to destroy the Devil ; that once in the end of 
the age He has appeared to put away, i.e., abolish 
sin by His sacrifice of Himself. Do say how 
the abolition of sin is or can be consistent with 
maintaining evil in Hell for ever ? Finally, 
let me remind you how precise and emphatic the 
promise is (see Hebrews viii. 10-1), that one day 
all shall know the Lord from the least to the 
greatest. Thus, the popular creed stands op- 
posed — hopelessly opposed — to the plainest 
teaching of the Word of God; nay, it may 
be said virtually to deny God Himself, because 
if we are to believe in God at all, there is no 
room for a defeated God. For as S. Jerome 
say, in words which I have already quoted 
(p. 157), " None can hinder His doing as He 
" wills. * * Now His will is that all should be 
" saved." Therefore, either God wills to save 
all men, and if so, He will assuredly accomplish 
this ; or He does not so will. The first proposi- 
tion involves the larger hope. The second is mere 
Calvinism.* I can see no rational alternative. 

Such is a very brief outline of the teaching of 



* And thus, since Calvinism has fallen into universal discredit, 
there has been a steady movement towards the larger hope on all 
sides. 



262 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



Scripture, for I have not by any means cited here 
all its promises of universal salvation. It 
is no case of isolated texts. It is no case 
of building upon Eastern metaphors, of dogma 
resting upon misconceptions of the original. 
It is quite the contrary. It is evidence, clear and 
unambiguous, and not this alone, but repeated 
over and over asrain, as we have seen. We have, 
in fact, line upon line, promise upon promise, 
assertions — varied, reiterated, accumulated — yet 
amid all their variety, pointing with one consent 
to this great central thought, to the completeness 
of the triumph of Jesus Christ, to the boundless 
nature of His empire over all souls ; to the 
assurance of a victory — infinite and absolute — 
won by His Incarnation, His Death, and His 
Resurrection over all the powers of evil. In 
the words of our ablest living commentator, " The 
" Father willed through Christ to reconcile the 
u universe once more unto Himself, * * and 
"so to restore all things whatsoever and where- 
" soever they be." — Lightfoot on Col. i. 20. 

This being so, let me next ask, have you, who 
maintain the popular creed, ever quietly thought 
over the terrible slight you offer to the whole 
work of Christ, to His Incarnation and His 
passion, by asserting the final loss of countless 
myriads of our race ? He has come, we know, 
to save the world. He, the Almighty One ; very 
God of very God: but you are never tired of 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



263 



proclaiming in all your writings, in all your 
pulpits, His defeat ! His Apostles announce, in 
language strong and clear, in words that still 
burn and throb with life, His victory over death. 
You announce death's victory over Him, for Hell 
filled -to all eternity with its wailing millions is 
His defeat, nay His utter defeat. Could you 
more effectually make light of His atonement ? 
Could you, in fact, more truly pour scorn on His 
Cross and Passion ? I read in His word that in 
His death all (actually). died (so vital, so close is 
the union between Him and all the race of man). 
Are they then to go down to endless pains, those 
lost ones who died with Jesus — (2 Cor. v. 
14, Rev. Ver.) — those souls of His creating, 
of His redeeming, still wet, so to speak, 
with His most precious blood, still pursued 
by His love (for love is unfailing) ; are these 
souls to spend an eternity of torment ? Am 
I to proclaim this as the victory of Jesus 
Christ, this as the glad tidings of great joy ? 

Permit me farther, for I want again and 
again to protest against the dishonour done to 
God's word by the popular creed — permit me 
before I leave this solemn subject, to ask what 
the meaning is on the popular view, of the oft- 
repeated promises of the New Testament to 
Christ of a universal empire ? What do they 
mean, if they do not really mean, that to C hrist's 
kingdom there shall one day be actually no limit ? 



264 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



Is it true, in the natural acceptance of the words, 
that in Christ, all things, Eph. i. 10 — the original 
words are the widest possible — are to be summed 
up. Is it true that Christ has actually abolished 
death ; that He has been manifested for this very 
end, that He might destroy all the works of the 
Devil ? Or is it a mere dream of the Evangelist, 
when He tells us that God has given to Him 
all things, and that all things that the Father 
hath given to Him shall come to Him ? But if 
all this, and far, far more than this, is actually 
written in Holy Scripture, how can it be truly 
taught that sin and Hell are endless ? 
What ! sin everlasting, and yet the sins of 
the world taken away by the Lamb of God. 
Hell for ever preying on the countless tribes of 
the lost, and yet the whole creation delivered 
into the glorious liberty of the children of God. 

Only reflect and see what it is the popular 
creed is, in fact, teaching. Christ, " holding 
" the keys of Hell" and never opening! Christ 
"making all things new," and yet things and 
persons innumerable not renewed ! The 
Good Shepherd " seeking till He finds," and 
yet never finding! " No more pain," and yet 
pain for evermore! " No more curse," and yet 
Hell echoing for ever with the curses of the lost ! 
" Tears wiped from every eye," and yet the lost 
" for ever weeping! Every creature which is in 
" Heaven and on the earth and under the earth, 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 265 



u and such as are on the sea and all that are in 
" them, saying blessing and glory and honour to 
"God," and yet an infinite number of creatures 
shut up for ever and ever in misery ! " All 
"made alive in Christ," and yet myriads sunk 
in hopeless, endless death. 

Finally, what remains to say? It remains 
only that I plead for the acceptance of the larger 
hope, as taught and believed by so many in 
primitive days; a hope, and a firm faith that it 
has ever been the purpose of our Father to save 
all His human children. To believe less than 
this would be, not alone to contradict the plain 
and repeated teachings of Holy Scripture, as I 
have tried to shew, but to mistake its whole 
scope and purpose. For what is the Bible? it 
is the story of a Restoration, wider, deeper, 
mightier than the Fall, and therefore bringing to 
every child of Adam healing and salvation. It 
is not, as the popular creed teaches, the self- 
contradictory story of One Almighty to save, 
and yet not, in fact, saving those for whom He 
died. It is the story of infinite love seeking " till 
it find," a love that never faileth, never, though 
Heaven and earth pass away. It is the story of 
the unchanging purpose of the unchanging God. 

Further, by this larger hope, and by it alone, 
can we accept and harmonize every line and 
letter of Holy Scripture, its solemn threatening^ 



266 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 



to the sinner, no less than its repeated promises 
of life to all. Those threatenings I accept 
implicitly. They are, as we have seen, fully 
reconciled with the promises of universal salva- 
tion the moment we have learned to realize the 
true meaning of God's judgements and penalties, 
and led by His word to see in 4 the ages ' yet to 
come His purposes being steadily worked out. 

Yes, I believe, because the New Testament so 
teaches, and all reason confirms it, that to this 
brief life there succeed many ages, and that 
" through these ages an increasing purpose runs." 
In these 'ages' and during their progress it is 
that God's threatenings find their complete 
fulfilment for the ungodly, and the many 
successive scenes of the drama of redemption 
are slowly unfolded, and carried to completion. 
For God's purpose to save all men once declared 
must stand firm for ever from His very nature; 
and to this end it is that His penalties are 
inflicted, that in Jesus Christ, one day, all 
created things may be summed up. And this 
being so, we who hold the larger hope are prepared 
fully to believe that there await the sinner in 
' the ages ' yet to come, God's fiery judgements ; 
that Ionian discipline protracted till the will of 
man yield to the will of "our Father," and till, 
as in the silent prophecy of the familiar words, 
" that will be done on earth as it is in heaven." 

For this I plead, for a hope, wide as that which 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 



267 



swelled the Saviour's heart, when looking steadily 
at the Cross He said " I, if I he lifted up will 
"draw all men unto Me." I plead for the 
simple truthfulness of the explicit promise made 
by all God's Holy Prophets, " that there shall 
"be a restitution of all things" — Acts iii. 21. 
The issue may be simply stated, is this promise 
true or is it untrue? The dilemma cannot be 
avoided — yes or no ? 

For my part, in this promise I believe — in the 
true catholicity of the Church ; of Christ, as 
destined to embrace all mankind in the power of 
His redemption, as something which no will can 
resist, to which all things must yield one day in 
perfect submission, love and harmony. I plead 
for the acceptance of this great central truth, that 
the victory of Jesus Christ must be final, abso- 
lute and complete — that nothing can impair the 
power of His Cross and passion to save the 
human race. I believe that He shall see of the 
travil of His soul, and be satisfied. And I feel 
assured that less than a world saved, a universe 
restored, could not satisfy the heart of Jesus 
Christ, or the love of our Father. Therefore in 
these pages I have pleaded for the larger hope. 
Therefore I believe in the vision, glorious beyond 
all power of human thought fully to realise, of 
a 4 Paradise regained,' of a universe from which 
every stain of sin shall have been swept away, in 
which every heart shall be full of blessedness, in 
which "God shall be All and in All." — Amen. 



f<3> 



■1 til 

h no 
^ne d. 
I 



" " ^ ,\\ , 0 N 0 • '/ 



* * O. 



<V if * o " c . 



o « i V ,A 



A 9 ' 



0 « .V 



if \> s S 



in A v 



,0 o 



0 ,0* 



^0 o. 



-\ 



A 



1 6 * *<tf> 



<i y o , v * ,'\ 



vOo. 



■» .p. 



0 



